[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160127063611.GM3322@vireshk>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 12:06:11 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Juri Lelli <Lelli" <juri.lelli@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] cpufreq: Use list_is_last() to check last entry
of the policy list
On 27-01-16, 12:02, Gautham R. Shenoy wrote:
> Currently next_policy() explicitly checks if a policy is the last
> policy in the cpufreq_policy_list. Use the standard list_is_last
> primitive instead.
>
> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Gautham R. Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> The earlier version one was based on an Juri's experimental branch.
> I have based this one on linux-pm.git linux-next branch.
>
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index c35e7da..e979ec7 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -48,11 +48,11 @@ static struct cpufreq_policy *next_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> bool active)
> {
> do {
> - policy = list_next_entry(policy, policy_list);
> -
> /* No more policies in the list */
> - if (&policy->policy_list == &cpufreq_policy_list)
> + if (list_is_last(&policy->policy_list, &cpufreq_policy_list))
> return NULL;
> +
> + policy = list_next_entry(policy, policy_list);
> } while (!suitable_policy(policy, active));
>
> return policy;
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists