lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] [Watchdog][Trivial] Added comments to explain watchdog_disabled variable
From
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> * anish singh <anish198519851985@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Is the below patch picked up?
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 9:31 PM, anish kumar <anish198519851985@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > From: anish kumar <anish198519851985@gmail.com>
>> >
>> > This watchdog_disabled flag is bit of cryptic.Howerver it's usefullnes is multifold.
>> > Uses are:
>> > 1. Check if smpboot_register_percpu_thread function passed.
>> > 2. Makes sure that user enables and disables the watchdog in sequence
>> > i.e. enable watchdog->disable watchdog->enable watchdog
>> > Unlike enable watchdog->enable watchdog which is wrong.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: anish kumar <anish198519851985@gmail.com>
>> > ---
>> > kernel/watchdog.c | 5 +++++
>> > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
>> > index 75a2ab3..87a19aa 100644
>> > --- a/kernel/watchdog.c
>> > +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
>> > @@ -518,6 +518,11 @@ int proc_dowatchdog(struct ctl_table *table, int write,
>> > return ret;
>> >
>> > set_sample_period();
>> > + /*
>> > + * We shouldn't enable watchdog threads if it is
>> > + * disabled.This is done by watchdog_disabled
>> > + * variable check in watchdog_*_all_cpus function.
>
> It has two grammatic and a stylistic error in it, plus misses
Would you mind pointing it out to me the grammatical mistakes
as I am not that good with grammar.
I thought I followed the conventions as below:
/*
*
*
*/
> the convention that function names are mentioned with a '()'.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-02-13 11:41    [W:1.541 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site