[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2737823.2JYE7UmLRN@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 00:11:29 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org, patches@...aro.org,
pdsw-power-team@....com, arvind.chauhan@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: return early from __cpufreq_driver_getavg()
On Saturday 20 of October 2012 01:42:05 Viresh Kumar wrote:
> There is no need to do cpufreq_get_cpu() and cpufreq_put_cpu() for drivers that
> don't support getavg() routine.
>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
The patch doesn't seem to follow the changelog or the other way around.
Thanks,
Rafael
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 85df538..f552d5f 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1511,12 +1511,14 @@ int __cpufreq_driver_getavg(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu)
> {
> int ret = 0;
>
> + if (!(cpu_online(cpu) && cpufreq_driver->getavg))
> + return 0;
> +
> policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(policy->cpu);
> if (!policy)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - if (cpu_online(cpu) && cpufreq_driver->getavg)
> - ret = cpufreq_driver->getavg(policy, cpu);
> + ret = cpufreq_driver->getavg(policy, cpu);
>
> cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> return ret;
>
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists