[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH V1 Resend 1/5] tick-common: fix wrong check in tick_check_replacement()

On Tue, 15 Apr 2014, Viresh Kumar wrote:

> tick_check_replacement() returns if a replacement of clock_event_device is
> possible or not. It does this as the first check:
> if (tick_check_percpu(curdev, newdev, smp_processor_id()))
> return false;
> This looks wrong as we are returning false when tick_check_percpu() returned
> true. Probably Thomas forgot '!' here in his commit: 03e13cf5e ?

Come on. You can do better changelogs.

"This looks wrong" is definitely not a good description of the

Either you know WHY it is wrong, then you say so. If not, then you can
send an RFC.

I fixed the changelog up this time.



 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-15 22:01    [W:0.088 / U:2.060 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site