On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 07:52 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 12:36 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/kvm.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/kvm.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/kvm.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
>
> > +#include <linux/percpu.h>
> > +#include <linux/mm.h>
> > +#include <linux/kvm_para.h>
> > +
> > +void __init kvm_guest_init(void)
> > +{
> > + if (!kvm_para_available())
> > + return;
> > +}
>
> This looks really odd. You have a void function that checks the return
> value of another function and returns if not true or.. returns if true.
> Why bother with the if at all?
Nevermind. I see you add more code below this in patch 3. Still looks
odd by itself, but makes more sense when the whole series is applied.
josh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
