Hi, Alex
>
>On Mon, 2008-03-24 at 18:49 +0900, Akio Takebe wrote:
>> >On Wed, 2008-03-19 at 22:46 +0900, Akio Takebe wrote:
>> >> ;;
>> >> +#ifdef PSR_DEFAULT_BITS
>> >> + sum PSR_DEFAULT_BITS
>> >> +#endif
>> >
>> > How would we ever get here w/o PSR_DEFAULT_BITS defined? Thanks,
>> >
>> I have tested with/without the patch, nothing happened.
>> But I wanted to be the same as native linux.
>
>Hi Akio,
>
> My comment is whether it's redundant to have the #ifdef
>PSR_DEFAULT_BITS surrounding setting the user mask. AFAICT, we can't
>get to this code w/o PSR_DEFAULT_BITS set, so it seems unnecessary to
>test for it. Thanks,
>
Ah, It's redundant. I remove the ifdef.
PSR_DEFAULT_BITS is always defined.
And even if PSR_DEFAULT_BITS == 0, sum 0x0 is harmless.
Signed-off-by: Akio Takebe <takebe_akio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Best Regards,
Akio Takebe
fix_set_psr_ac.2.patch
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|