On Tue, 8 May 2007 12:33:48 +0200
Jarek Poplawski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Jarek Poplawski <[email protected]>
>
> ---
>
> diff -Nurp 2.6.21-mm1-/kernel/timer.c 2.6.21-mm1/kernel/timer.c
> --- 2.6.21-mm1-/kernel/timer.c 2007-05-08 11:54:48.000000000 +0200
> +++ 2.6.21-mm1/kernel/timer.c 2007-05-08 12:05:11.000000000 +0200
> @@ -92,24 +92,24 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(tvec_base_t *, tve
> /* Functions below help us manage 'deferrable' flag */
> static inline unsigned int tbase_get_deferrable(tvec_base_t *base)
> {
> - return ((unsigned int)(unsigned long)base & TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG);
> + return (unsigned int)((unsigned long)base & TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG);
> }
>
> static inline tvec_base_t *tbase_get_base(tvec_base_t *base)
> {
> - return ((tvec_base_t *)((unsigned long)base & ~TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG));
> + return (tvec_base_t *)((unsigned long)base & ~TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG);
> }
>
> static inline void timer_set_deferrable(struct timer_list *timer)
> {
> - timer->base = ((tvec_base_t *)((unsigned long)(timer->base) |
> - TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG));
> + timer->base = (tvec_base_t *)((unsigned long)timer->base |
> + TBASE_DEFERRABLE_FLAG);
> }
>
> static inline void
> timer_set_base(struct timer_list *timer, tvec_base_t *new_base)
> {
> - timer->base = (tvec_base_t *)((unsigned long)(new_base) |
> + timer->base = (tvec_base_t *)((unsigned long)new_base |
> tbase_get_deferrable(timer->base));
> }
>
The change makes sense, but does it actually "fix" anything?
-
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/
[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]
