On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 17:14 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
quoted text
> On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 13:32:35 -0000
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> 
> >  	if (!dev || !(dev->features & CLOCK_EVT_FEAT_ONESHOT) ||
> > -	    !tick_device_is_functional(dev))
> > +		    !tick_device_is_functional(dev)) {
> > +
> > +		printk(KERN_INFO "Clockevents: "
> > +		       "could not switch to one-shot mode:");
> > +		if (!dev) {
> > +			printk(" no tick device\n");
> > +		} else {
> > +			if (!tick_device_is_functional(dev))
> > +				printk(" %s is not functional.\n", dev->name);
> > +			else if (!(dev->features & CLOCK_EVT_FEAT_ONESHOT))
> > +				printk(" %s does not support one-shot mode.\n",
> > +				       dev->name);
> > +		}
> 
> There is a logic path through here where the printk doesn't get its \n
> termination?  And it will fail to print the reason for the failure, too.
> 
> Maybe that's a can't-happen, in which case the CLOCK_EVT_FEAT_ONESHOT test
> is superfluous?

Right, the "else if (...)" test is bogus. A simple "else" is sufficient.

	tglx


-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/