[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170329080603.GV10289@e106622-lin>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:06:03 +0100
From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
LAK <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] arm: fix return value of parse_cpu_capacity
On 29/03/17 09:37, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 27 March 2017 at 15:18, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com> wrote:
> > parse_cpu_capacity() has to return 0 on failure, but it currently returns
> > 1 instead if raw_capacity kcalloc failed.
> >
> > Fix it by removing the negation of the return value.
> >
> > Cc: Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
> > Reported-by: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>
> > Fixes: 06073ee26775 ('ARM: 8621/3: parse cpu capacity-dmips-mhz from DT')
> > Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm/kernel/topology.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
> > index f8a3ab82e77f..4e4af809606a 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
> > @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ static int __init parse_cpu_capacity(struct device_node *cpu_node, int cpu)
> > if (!raw_capacity) {
> > pr_err("cpu_capacity: failed to allocate memory for raw capacities\n");
> > cap_parsing_failed = true;
> > - return !ret;
> > + return ret;
>
> Why not directly returning 0 ? whatever the value of ret, the parse of
> cpu capacity has failed in this case
>
Sure, can change that.
Thanks,
- Juri
Powered by blists - more mailing lists