提交 7351c0bf 编写于 作者: A Andi Kleen 提交者: Linus Torvalds

[PATCH] x86_64: Fix formatting in time.c

Only white space changes, code should be identical
Signed-off-by: NAndi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
上级 6954bee8
......@@ -88,7 +88,8 @@ static inline unsigned int do_gettimeoffset_tsc(void)
unsigned long t;
unsigned long x;
t = get_cycles_sync();
if (t < vxtime.last_tsc) t = vxtime.last_tsc; /* hack */
if (t < vxtime.last_tsc)
t = vxtime.last_tsc; /* hack */
x = ((t - vxtime.last_tsc) * vxtime.tsc_quot) >> 32;
return x;
}
......@@ -178,8 +179,9 @@ unsigned long profile_pc(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
unsigned long pc = instruction_pointer(regs);
/* Assume the lock function has either no stack frame or only a single word.
This checks if the address on the stack looks like a kernel text address.
/* Assume the lock function has either no stack frame or only a single
word. This checks if the address on the stack looks like a kernel
text address.
There is a small window for false hits, but in that case the tick
is just accounted to the spinlock function.
Better would be to write these functions in assembler again
......@@ -293,8 +295,7 @@ unsigned long long monotonic_clock(void)
this_offset = hpet_readl(HPET_COUNTER);
} while (read_seqretry(&xtime_lock, seq));
offset = (this_offset - last_offset);
offset *=(NSEC_PER_SEC/HZ)/hpet_tick;
return base + offset;
offset *= (NSEC_PER_SEC/HZ) / hpet_tick;
} else {
do {
seq = read_seqbegin(&xtime_lock);
......@@ -303,9 +304,9 @@ unsigned long long monotonic_clock(void)
base = monotonic_base;
} while (read_seqretry(&xtime_lock, seq));
this_offset = get_cycles_sync();
offset = (this_offset - last_offset)*1000/cpu_khz;
return base + offset;
offset = (this_offset - last_offset)*1000 / cpu_khz;
}
return base + offset;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(monotonic_clock);
......@@ -313,23 +314,21 @@ static noinline void handle_lost_ticks(int lost, struct pt_regs *regs)
{
static long lost_count;
static int warned;
if (report_lost_ticks) {
printk(KERN_WARNING "time.c: Lost %d timer "
"tick(s)! ", lost);
printk(KERN_WARNING "time.c: Lost %d timer tick(s)! ", lost);
print_symbol("rip %s)\n", regs->rip);
}
if (lost_count == 1000 && !warned) {
printk(KERN_WARNING
"warning: many lost ticks.\n"
printk(KERN_WARNING "warning: many lost ticks.\n"
KERN_WARNING "Your time source seems to be instable or "
"some driver is hogging interupts\n");
print_symbol("rip %s\n", regs->rip);
if (vxtime.mode == VXTIME_TSC && vxtime.hpet_address) {
printk(KERN_WARNING "Falling back to HPET\n");
if (hpet_use_timer)
vxtime.last = hpet_readl(HPET_T0_CMP) - hpet_tick;
vxtime.last = hpet_readl(HPET_T0_CMP) -
hpet_tick;
else
vxtime.last = hpet_readl(HPET_COUNTER);
vxtime.mode = VXTIME_HPET;
......@@ -342,11 +341,9 @@ static noinline void handle_lost_ticks(int lost, struct pt_regs *regs)
#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ
/* In some cases the CPU can change frequency without us noticing
(like going into thermal throttle)
Give cpufreq a change to catch up. */
if ((lost_count+1) % 25 == 0) {
if ((lost_count+1) % 25 == 0)
cpufreq_delayed_get();
}
#endif
}
......@@ -618,7 +615,8 @@ static void cpufreq_delayed_get(void)
cpufreq_delayed_issched = 1;
if (!warned) {
warned = 1;
printk(KERN_DEBUG "Losing some ticks... checking if CPU frequency changed.\n");
printk(KERN_DEBUG
"Losing some ticks... checking if CPU frequency changed.\n");
}
schedule_work(&cpufreq_delayed_get_work);
}
......@@ -780,9 +778,8 @@ static __init int late_hpet_init(void)
int i;
hpet = (struct hpet *) fix_to_virt(FIX_HPET_BASE);
for (i = 2, timer = &hpet->hpet_timers[2]; i < ntimer;
timer++, i++)
timer = &hpet->hpet_timers[2];
for (i = 2; i < ntimer; timer++, i++)
hd.hd_irq[i] = (timer->hpet_config &
Tn_INT_ROUTE_CNF_MASK) >>
Tn_INT_ROUTE_CNF_SHIFT;
......@@ -939,8 +936,7 @@ void __init time_init(void)
-xtime.tv_sec, -xtime.tv_nsec);
if (!hpet_init())
vxtime_hz = (1000000000000000L + hpet_period / 2) /
hpet_period;
vxtime_hz = (1000000000000000L + hpet_period / 2) / hpet_period;
else
vxtime.hpet_address = 0;
......
Markdown is supported
0% .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑!
想要评论请 注册