On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:28:30AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 11 May 2015 17:10:59 +0200 > Nicholas Mc Guire <hof...@osadl.org> wrote: > > > rcu_cpu_has_callbacks() is declared int but is actually returning bool and > > and as the function description states " * Return true if the specified > > CPU has any callback....", this probably should be a bool. All (3) > > call-sites currently treat it as bool so the declaration. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hof...@osadl.org> > > --- > > > > V2: fixed up commit message and tool infos as requested by > > Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org> > > > > Type-checking coccinelle spatches are being used to locate type > > mismatches between function signatures and return values. > > ./kernel/rcu/tree.c:3538 WARNING: return of wrong type > > int != bool, > > > > Patch was compile tested with x86_64_defconfig (implies CONFIG_TREE_RCU=y) > > > > Patch is against 4.1-rc3 (localversion-next is -next-20150511) > > I think what Josh was saying is that all the above except for the "V2" > should be above the signature. Everything between the "---" and the > patch gets tossed out when committed into git. > > Giving credit to coccinelle and even what branch and config was used > for testing is something we want in the git change log history.
Yes, exactly. - Josh Triplett -- 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/
