On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 5:03 PM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 5:53 PM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 4:48 PM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: >> > >> > I may have missed something. Commented in one place. >> > >> > It looks like mostly spaces inside () and variable/parameter declaration >> > changes. >> > >> Yes, for the most part those are the least consistent so far. >> >> > On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 4:38 PM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> wrote: >> >> diff --git a/cpukit/score/cpu/arm/armv7m-isr-dispatch.c >> >> b/cpukit/score/cpu/arm/armv7m-isr-dispatch.c >> >> index ea168969ba..dfc125d545 100644 >> >> --- a/cpukit/score/cpu/arm/armv7m-isr-dispatch.c >> >> +++ b/cpukit/score/cpu/arm/armv7m-isr-dispatch.c >> >> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ >> >> >> >> #ifdef ARM_MULTILIB_ARCH_V7M >> >> >> >> -static void __attribute__((naked)) _ARMV7M_Thread_dispatch( void ) >> >> +static void __attribute__((naked)) _ARMV7M_Thread_dispatch(void) >> >> { >> >> __asm__ volatile ( >> >> "bl _Thread_Dispatch\n" >> >> @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ static void __attribute__((naked)) >> >> _ARMV7M_Thread_dispatch( void ) >> >> ); >> >> } >> >> >> >> -static void _ARMV7M_Trigger_lazy_floating_point_context_save( void ) >> >> +static void _ARMV7M_Trigger_lazy_floating_point_context_save(void) >> >> { >> >> #ifdef ARM_MULTILIB_VFP >> >> __asm__ volatile ( >> >> @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ static void >> >> _ARMV7M_Trigger_lazy_floating_point_context_save( void ) >> >> #endif >> >> } >> >> >> >> -void _ARMV7M_Pendable_service_call( void ) >> >> +void _ARMV7M_Pendable_service_call(void) >> >> { >> >> Per_CPU_Control *cpu_self = _Per_CPU_Get(); >> >> >> >> @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ void _ARMV7M_Pendable_service_call( void ) >> >> * this interrupt service may be delayed until interrupts are enable >> >> again. >> >> */ >> >> if ( >> >> - ( cpu_self->isr_nest_level | cpu_self->thread_dispatch_disable_level >> >> ) == 0 >> >> + (cpu_self->isr_nest_level | cpu_self->thread_dispatch_disable_level) >> >> == 0 >> >> ) { >> > >> > >> > Does this fit on a single line? >> > >> No. it's like two characters short. In fact, i had to do this one >> manually. otherwise, it breaks as >> if ( (... >> ) == 0 ) { > > > ! instead of == 0? :)
I'm not sure I want to nitpick on code changes during this pass. Feel free to send a patch for code changes though ;) >> >> >> > Ignoring the fact it is using bitwise operations on two integer counters. >> > Perhaps >> > it should be a +? >> > >> separate problem I suppose. That is a little bit of a suspicious bit of >> logic. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel