| Message ID | 20240103031409.2504051-7-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | pmu test bugs fix and improvements | expand |
On Wed, Jan 03, 2024, Dapeng Mi wrote: > code style changes. > > Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com> > --- > x86/pmu.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/x86/pmu.c b/x86/pmu.c > index a2c64a1ce95b..46bed66c5c9f 100644 > --- a/x86/pmu.c > +++ b/x86/pmu.c > @@ -207,8 +207,7 @@ static noinline void __measure(pmu_counter_t *evt, uint64_t count) > static bool verify_event(uint64_t count, struct pmu_event *e) > { > // printf("%d <= %ld <= %d\n", e->min, count, e->max); > - return count >= e->min && count <= e->max; > - > + return count >= e->min && count <= e->max; > } > > static bool verify_counter(pmu_counter_t *cnt) > -- > 2.34.1 >
On 1/3/2024 11:14 AM, Dapeng Mi wrote: > code style changes. > > Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> > --- > x86/pmu.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/x86/pmu.c b/x86/pmu.c > index a2c64a1ce95b..46bed66c5c9f 100644 > --- a/x86/pmu.c > +++ b/x86/pmu.c > @@ -207,8 +207,7 @@ static noinline void __measure(pmu_counter_t *evt, uint64_t count) > static bool verify_event(uint64_t count, struct pmu_event *e) > { > // printf("%d <= %ld <= %d\n", e->min, count, e->max); > - return count >= e->min && count <= e->max; > - > + return count >= e->min && count <= e->max; I don't think it's necessary to fix the nit in a separate patch, just squash it in some patch with "Opportunistically ...." > } > > static bool verify_counter(pmu_counter_t *cnt)
On 3/28/2024 9:23 AM, Yang, Weijiang wrote: > On 1/3/2024 11:14 AM, Dapeng Mi wrote: >> code style changes. >> >> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> >> --- >> x86/pmu.c | 3 +-- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/x86/pmu.c b/x86/pmu.c >> index a2c64a1ce95b..46bed66c5c9f 100644 >> --- a/x86/pmu.c >> +++ b/x86/pmu.c >> @@ -207,8 +207,7 @@ static noinline void __measure(pmu_counter_t >> *evt, uint64_t count) >> static bool verify_event(uint64_t count, struct pmu_event *e) >> { >> // printf("%d <= %ld <= %d\n", e->min, count, e->max); >> - return count >= e->min && count <= e->max; >> - >> + return count >= e->min && count <= e->max; > > I don't think it's necessary to fix the nit in a separate patch, just > squash it in some patch with > "Opportunistically ...." Not sure this, I was always required to use a separate patch to refactor the code style faults by reviewers. It looks a unwritten rule for Linux. > >> } >> static bool verify_counter(pmu_counter_t *cnt) >
diff --git a/x86/pmu.c b/x86/pmu.c index a2c64a1ce95b..46bed66c5c9f 100644 --- a/x86/pmu.c +++ b/x86/pmu.c @@ -207,8 +207,7 @@ static noinline void __measure(pmu_counter_t *evt, uint64_t count) static bool verify_event(uint64_t count, struct pmu_event *e) { // printf("%d <= %ld <= %d\n", e->min, count, e->max); - return count >= e->min && count <= e->max; - + return count >= e->min && count <= e->max; } static bool verify_counter(pmu_counter_t *cnt)
code style changes. Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> --- x86/pmu.c | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)