| Message ID | 5f6d6706080162736de076afec8fc0ad8cc8dcac.1536715396.git.sbobroff@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 473af09b56dc4be68e4af33220ceca6be67aa60d |
| Headers | show |
| Series | EEH refactoring 3 | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| snowpatch_ozlabs/apply_patch | success | next/apply_patch Successfully applied |
| snowpatch_ozlabs/checkpatch | success | Test checkpatch on branch next |
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_pe.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_pe.c index 1b238ecc553e..210d239a9395 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_pe.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_pe.c @@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ int eeh_add_to_parent_pe(struct eeh_dev *edev) while (parent) { if (!(parent->type & EEH_PE_INVALID)) break; - parent->type &= ~(EEH_PE_INVALID | EEH_PE_KEEP); + parent->type &= ~EEH_PE_INVALID; parent = parent->parent; }
eeh_add_to_parent_pe() sometimes removes the EEH_PE_KEEP flag, but it incorrectly removes it from pe->type, instead of pe->state. However, rather than clearing it from the correct field, remove it. Inspection of the code shows that it can't ever have had any effect (even if it had been cleared from the correct field), because the field is never tested after it is cleared by the statement in question. The clear statement was added by commit 807a827d4e74 ("powerpc/eeh: Keep PE during hotplug"), but it didn't explain why it was necessary. Signed-off-by: Sam Bobroff <sbobroff@linux.ibm.com> --- arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_pe.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)