linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/20] cpufreq: acpi-cpufreq: Use cpufreq_for_each

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <534D1138.90409@semaphore.gr>
Date:	Tue, 15 Apr 2014 14:00:08 +0300
From:	Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@...aphore.gr>
To:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
CC:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/20] cpufreq: acpi-cpufreq: Use cpufreq_for_each_entry
 macro for iteration

On 15/04/2014 08:32 πμ, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 15 April 2014 02:38, Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@...aphore.gr> wrote:
>> The cpufreq core supports the cpufreq_for_each_entry macro helper
>> for iteration over the cpufreq_frequency_table, so use it.
>>
>> It should have no functional changes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@...aphore.gr>
>> ---
>>  drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 10 +++++-----
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
>> index 000e4e0..12a5750 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
>> @@ -213,7 +213,7 @@ static unsigned extract_io(u32 value, struct acpi_cpufreq_data *data)
>>
>>  static unsigned extract_msr(u32 msr, struct acpi_cpufreq_data *data)
>>  {
>> -       int i;
>> +       struct cpufreq_frequency_table *pos;
>>         struct acpi_processor_performance *perf;
>>
>>         if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD)
>> @@ -223,11 +223,11 @@ static unsigned extract_msr(u32 msr, struct acpi_cpufreq_data *data)
>>
>>         perf = data->acpi_data;
>>
>> -       for (i = 0; data->freq_table[i].frequency != CPUFREQ_TABLE_END; i++) {
>> -               if (msr == perf->states[data->freq_table[i].driver_data].status)
>> -                       return data->freq_table[i].frequency;
>> +       cpufreq_for_each_entry(pos, data->freq_table) {
>> +               if (msr == perf->states[pos->driver_data].status)
>> +                       return pos->frequency;
>>         }
>> -       return data->freq_table[0].frequency;
>> +       return data->freq_table->frequency;
> 
> This isn't a related change, isn't it? Also it make it less readable.
> So probably
> just leave it as is.
> 

I thought that since we use pointer notation it would be more clear.
But, I will change it according to your suggestion.


Stratos
--
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/