linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: unlock when failing cpufreq_update

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

Message-ID: <CAKohpo=bGz97TJeY51M7k9VSHww=pk5TULEAROHRkp5x9-L-8w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 18 Jun 2014 20:11:48 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Aaron Plattner <aplattner@...dia.com>
Cc:	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: unlock when failing cpufreq_update_policy()

On 18 June 2014 20:09, Aaron Plattner <aplattner@...dia.com> wrote:
> I assume you meant "return -ENODEV"?

Yeah, sorry :)

>>          down_write(&policy->rwsem);
>>
>> @@ -2279,10 +2277,10 @@ int cpufreq_update_policy(unsigned int cpu)
>>
>>          ret = cpufreq_set_policy(policy, &new_policy);
>>
>> +no_policy:
>
>
> 'no_policy' implied to me that policy was NULL, so this label should still
> be renamed to 'unlock'.  I'll send out a v2 that does this.

Yeah.
--
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/