[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20171106091306.107140833@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2017 10:43:41 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...izon.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 18/67] cpufreq: Do not clear real_cpus mask on policy init
4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
[ Upstream commit f451014692ae34e587b00de6745e16661cf734d8 ]
If new_policy is set in cpufreq_online(), the policy object has just
been created and its real_cpus mask has been zeroed on allocation,
and the driver's ->init() callback should not touch it.
It doesn't need to be cleared again, so don't do that.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...izon.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1172,8 +1172,6 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int c
if (new_policy) {
/* related_cpus should at least include policy->cpus. */
cpumask_copy(policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus);
- /* Clear mask of registered CPUs */
- cpumask_clear(policy->real_cpus);
}
/*
Powered by blists - more mailing lists