From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@kernel.org (Mark Brown) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 16:33:39 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings In-Reply-To: <20140319160414.GA19953@red-moon> References: <1394009975-28655-1-git-send-email-broonie@kernel.org> <20140319160414.GA19953@red-moon> Message-ID: <20140319163339.GP11706@sirena.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 04:04:14PM +0000, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 08:59:33AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > + if (leaf) { > > + ret = parse_core(c, cluster_id, core_id++); > > + if (ret != 0) { > Should remove braces. > > + return ret; > > + } > > + } else { They're there because it's nested inside another if statement with braces - yes, there is indentation but it still helps. > > +void __init init_cpu_topology(void) > > +{ > > + int ret; > > + > > + reset_cpu_topology(); > > + > > + ret = parse_dt_topology(); > > + if (ret != 0) > > + reset_cpu_topology(); > ret is unused so should be removed. You could remove the first reset call and I'm sorry, I don't follow? The use is quoted above... > use static initialization for that, it is a matter of taste though. Static initialisation can't cover the calls to set_power_scale() and having a different thing for default and unwinding cases seems likely to be error prone. > A comment is in order, whatever approach you go for. I'm not sure what the confusion is here so I don't know what a comment would clarify. Could you say what it is you find confusing please? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: