Donate to e Foundation | Murena handsets with /e/OS | Own a part of Murena! Learn more

Commit ade8c56c authored by Randy Dunlap's avatar Randy Dunlap Committed by Linus Torvalds
Browse files

x86 bitops: fix code style issues 



Coding style cleanups:

- change __inline__ to inline;
- drop space in "* addr" parameters;
- drop space between func. name and '('

The "volatile" keywords are correct according to email from one
Linus Torvalds.

[Several other arches need some of this also.]

Signed-off-by: default avatarRandy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
parent fb9431eb

include/asm-x86/bitops_64.h

+26 −26
Original line number Diff line number Diff line
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ 
 * Note that @nr may be almost arbitrarily large; this function is not

 * restricted to acting on a single-word quantity.

 */

static __inline__ void set_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline void set_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	__asm__ __volatile__( LOCK_PREFIX

		"btsl %1,%0"
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ static __inline__ void set_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr) 
 * If it's called on the same region of memory simultaneously, the effect

 * may be that only one operation succeeds.

 */

static __inline__ void __set_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline void __set_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	__asm__ volatile(

		"btsl %1,%0"
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ static __inline__ void __set_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr) 
 * you should call smp_mb__before_clear_bit() and/or smp_mb__after_clear_bit()

 * in order to ensure changes are visible on other processors.

 */

static __inline__ void clear_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline void clear_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	__asm__ __volatile__( LOCK_PREFIX

		"btrl %1,%0"
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ static inline void clear_bit_unlock(unsigned long nr, volatile unsigned long *ad 
	clear_bit(nr, addr);

}



static __inline__ void __clear_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline void __clear_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	__asm__ __volatile__(

		"btrl %1,%0"
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ static inline void __clear_bit_unlock(unsigned long nr, volatile unsigned long * 
 * If it's called on the same region of memory simultaneously, the effect

 * may be that only one operation succeeds.

 */

static __inline__ void __change_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline void __change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	__asm__ __volatile__(

		"btcl %1,%0"
@@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ static __inline__ void __change_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr) 
 * Note that @nr may be almost arbitrarily large; this function is not

 * restricted to acting on a single-word quantity.

 */

static __inline__ void change_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline void change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	__asm__ __volatile__( LOCK_PREFIX

		"btcl %1,%0"
@@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static __inline__ void change_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr) 
 * This operation is atomic and cannot be reordered.  

 * It also implies a memory barrier.

 */

static __inline__ int test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline int test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	int oldbit;
@@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ static __inline__ int test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr) 
 *

 * This is the same as test_and_set_bit on x86.

 */

static __inline__ int test_and_set_bit_lock(int nr, volatile void *addr)

static inline int test_and_set_bit_lock(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	return test_and_set_bit(nr, addr);

}
@@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ static __inline__ int test_and_set_bit_lock(int nr, volatile void *addr) 
 * If two examples of this operation race, one can appear to succeed

 * but actually fail.  You must protect multiple accesses with a lock.

 */

static __inline__ int __test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline int __test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	int oldbit;
@@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ static __inline__ int __test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr) 
 * This operation is atomic and cannot be reordered.  

 * It also implies a memory barrier.

 */

static __inline__ int test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline int test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	int oldbit;
@@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ static __inline__ int test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr) 
 * If two examples of this operation race, one can appear to succeed

 * but actually fail.  You must protect multiple accesses with a lock.

 */

static __inline__ int __test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline int __test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	int oldbit;
@@ -240,7 +240,7 @@ static __inline__ int __test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr) 
}



/* WARNING: non atomic and it can be reordered! */

static __inline__ int __test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline int __test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	int oldbit;
@@ -259,7 +259,7 @@ static __inline__ int __test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr) 
 * This operation is atomic and cannot be reordered.  

 * It also implies a memory barrier.

 */

static __inline__ int test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr)

static inline int test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)

{

	int oldbit;
@@ -279,12 +279,12 @@ static __inline__ int test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr) 
static int test_bit(int nr, const volatile void *addr);

#endif



static __inline__ int constant_test_bit(int nr, const volatile void * addr)

static inline int constant_test_bit(int nr, const volatile void *addr)

{

	return ((1UL << (nr & 31)) & (((const volatile unsigned int *) addr)[nr >> 5])) != 0;

}



static __inline__ int variable_test_bit(int nr, volatile const void * addr)

static inline int variable_test_bit(int nr, volatile const void *addr)

{

	int oldbit;
@@ -366,7 +366,7 @@ static inline void __clear_bit_string(unsigned long *bitmap, unsigned long i, 
 *

 * Undefined if no zero exists, so code should check against ~0UL first.

 */

static __inline__ unsigned long ffz(unsigned long word)

static inline unsigned long ffz(unsigned long word)

{

	__asm__("bsfq %1,%0"

		:"=r" (word)
@@ -380,7 +380,7 @@ static __inline__ unsigned long ffz(unsigned long word) 
 *

 * Undefined if no bit exists, so code should check against 0 first.

 */

static __inline__ unsigned long __ffs(unsigned long word)

static inline unsigned long __ffs(unsigned long word)

{

	__asm__("bsfq %1,%0"

		:"=r" (word)
@@ -394,7 +394,7 @@ static __inline__ unsigned long __ffs(unsigned long word) 
 *

 * Undefined if no zero exists, so code should check against ~0UL first.

 */

static __inline__ unsigned long __fls(unsigned long word)

static inline unsigned long __fls(unsigned long word)

{

	__asm__("bsrq %1,%0"

		:"=r" (word)
@@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ static __inline__ unsigned long __fls(unsigned long word) 
 * the libc and compiler builtin ffs routines, therefore

 * differs in spirit from the above ffz (man ffs).

 */

static __inline__ int ffs(int x)

static inline int ffs(int x)

{

	int r;
@@ -430,7 +430,7 @@ static __inline__ int ffs(int x) 
 *

 * This is defined the same way as fls.

 */

static __inline__ int fls64(__u64 x)

static inline int fls64(__u64 x)

{

	if (x == 0)

		return 0;
@@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ static __inline__ int fls64(__u64 x) 
 *

 * This is defined the same way as ffs.

 */

static __inline__ int fls(int x)

static inline int fls(int x)

{

	int r;