[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160210053637.GP22111@vireshk>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 11:06:37 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 5/7] cpufreq: governor: No need to manage state
machine now
On 10-02-16, 01:36, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > static int cpufreq_governor_stop(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> > {
> > - struct policy_dbs_info *policy_dbs = policy->governor_data;
> > -
> > - /* State should be equivalent to START */
> > - if (!policy_dbs->policy)
> > - return -EBUSY;
> > -
> > - gov_cancel_work(policy_dbs);
> > - policy_dbs->policy = NULL;
> > + gov_cancel_work(policy);
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
>
> So maybe we can call gov_cancel_work(policy) from
> cpufreq_governor_dbs() directly and get rid of this wrapper too?
I thought about it, but left it for consistency. It wouldn't hurt, the
compiler will anyway make it inline I believe.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists