Re: [PATCH] x86: make SMP locks handling interact properly with CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA (2nd try)

Jan Beulich wrote:
> +	if (va < MODULES_VADDR) {
> +		change_page_attr(virt_to_page(instr),
> +				 PFN_UP(va + len) - PFN_DOWN(va),
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> +				 PAGE_KERNEL_RO);
> +#else
> +				 PAGE_KERNEL_RX);
> +#endif
>   

This kind if unbalanced parenthesis can confuse various tools.  Format
it differently?

    J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] x86: make SMP locks handling interact properly with CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA (2nd try)
    • From: "Jan Beulich" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Containers: css_put() dilemma
• Next by Date: Re: Containers: css_put() dilemma
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] x86: make SMP locks handling interact properly with CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA (2nd try)
• Next by thread: [PATCH] i386: es7000 build breakage fix
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]