IS_ERR_VALUE() already contains it and so we need to add this only to the !ptr check. That will allow users of IS_ERR_OR_NULL(), to not add this compiler flag.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org --- @Jiri: You have applied all other patches, but this one. Can you please apply this one as well, as all others were applied based on the assumption that this one is applied. :)
include/linux/err.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/err.h b/include/linux/err.h index a729120644d5..56762ab41713 100644 --- a/include/linux/err.h +++ b/include/linux/err.h @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static inline bool __must_check IS_ERR(__force const void *ptr)
static inline bool __must_check IS_ERR_OR_NULL(__force const void *ptr) { - return !ptr || IS_ERR_VALUE((unsigned long)ptr); + return unlikely(!ptr) || IS_ERR_VALUE((unsigned long)ptr); }
/**
On 13-10-15, 13:57, Viresh Kumar wrote:
IS_ERR_VALUE() already contains it and so we need to add this only to the !ptr check. That will allow users of IS_ERR_OR_NULL(), to not add this compiler flag.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
@Jiri: You have applied all other patches, but this one. Can you please apply this one as well, as all others were applied based on the assumption that this one is applied. :)
include/linux/err.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/err.h b/include/linux/err.h index a729120644d5..56762ab41713 100644 --- a/include/linux/err.h +++ b/include/linux/err.h @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static inline bool __must_check IS_ERR(__force const void *ptr) static inline bool __must_check IS_ERR_OR_NULL(__force const void *ptr) {
- return !ptr || IS_ERR_VALUE((unsigned long)ptr);
- return unlikely(!ptr) || IS_ERR_VALUE((unsigned long)ptr);
}
Ping !!
On 29-10-15, 07:57, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 13-10-15, 13:57, Viresh Kumar wrote:
IS_ERR_VALUE() already contains it and so we need to add this only to the !ptr check. That will allow users of IS_ERR_OR_NULL(), to not add this compiler flag.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
@Jiri: You have applied all other patches, but this one. Can you please apply this one as well, as all others were applied based on the assumption that this one is applied. :)
include/linux/err.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/err.h b/include/linux/err.h index a729120644d5..56762ab41713 100644 --- a/include/linux/err.h +++ b/include/linux/err.h @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static inline bool __must_check IS_ERR(__force const void *ptr) static inline bool __must_check IS_ERR_OR_NULL(__force const void *ptr) {
- return !ptr || IS_ERR_VALUE((unsigned long)ptr);
- return unlikely(!ptr) || IS_ERR_VALUE((unsigned long)ptr);
}
Ping !!
Another Ping !!
On 13-11-15, 13:53, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 29-10-15, 07:57, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 13-10-15, 13:57, Viresh Kumar wrote:
IS_ERR_VALUE() already contains it and so we need to add this only to the !ptr check. That will allow users of IS_ERR_OR_NULL(), to not add this compiler flag.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
@Jiri: You have applied all other patches, but this one. Can you please apply this one as well, as all others were applied based on the assumption that this one is applied. :)
include/linux/err.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/err.h b/include/linux/err.h index a729120644d5..56762ab41713 100644 --- a/include/linux/err.h +++ b/include/linux/err.h @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static inline bool __must_check IS_ERR(__force const void *ptr) static inline bool __must_check IS_ERR_OR_NULL(__force const void *ptr) {
- return !ptr || IS_ERR_VALUE((unsigned long)ptr);
- return unlikely(!ptr) || IS_ERR_VALUE((unsigned long)ptr);
}
Ping !!
Another Ping !!
@Andrew: Will it be possible for you to apply this patch ? Its been on the lists for over 2 months now.
linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org
-
Viresh Kumar