On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 08:31:53PM +0100, Mirsal Ennaime wrote:
> @@ -2943,28 +2944,39 @@ static void binder_deferred_release(struct
> binder_proc *proc)
>
> threads = 0;
> active_transactions = 0;
> +
The blank line here isn't really appropriate. The initialization is
logically a part of the loop. It's part of the same paragraph.
> while ((n = rb_first(&proc->threads))) {
> - struct binder_thread *thread = rb_entry(n, struct
> binder_thread, rb_node);
> + struct binder_thread *thread = rb_entry(n,
> + struct binder_thread,
> + rb_node);
Do this instead:
struct binder_thread *thread;
thread = rb_entry(n, struct binder_thread, rb_node);
> +
> threads++;
> active_transactions += binder_free_thread(proc, thread);
> }
> +
> nodes = 0;
> incoming_refs = 0;
> +
> while ((n = rb_first(&proc->nodes))) {
> - struct binder_node *node = rb_entry(n, struct binder_node,
> rb_node);
> + struct binder_node *node = rb_entry(n,
> + struct binder_node,
> + rb_node);
>
Same thing again.
regards,
dan carpenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
