[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3624116.FYVZqeVW1R@aspire.rjw.lan>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 11:49:13 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Anson Huang <anson.huang@....com>
Cc: "viresh.kumar@...aro.org" <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: imx6q: remove unused code
On Monday, November 26, 2018 3:59:45 AM CET Anson Huang wrote:
> In voltage scale down path, the return value is NOT
> used at all, remove them to simplify the code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@....com>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c | 12 +++---------
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c
> index d8c3595..8cb9683 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c
> @@ -177,22 +177,16 @@ static int imx6q_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index)
> /* scaling down? scale voltage after frequency */
> if (new_freq < old_freq) {
> ret = regulator_set_voltage_tol(arm_reg, volt, 0);
> - if (ret) {
> + if (ret)
> dev_warn(cpu_dev,
> "failed to scale vddarm down: %d\n", ret);
> - ret = 0;
> - }
> ret = regulator_set_voltage_tol(soc_reg, imx6_soc_volt[index], 0);
> - if (ret) {
> + if (ret)
> dev_warn(cpu_dev, "failed to scale vddsoc down: %d\n", ret);
> - ret = 0;
> - }
> if (!IS_ERR(pu_reg)) {
> ret = regulator_set_voltage_tol(pu_reg, imx6_soc_volt[index], 0);
> - if (ret) {
> + if (ret)
> dev_warn(cpu_dev, "failed to scale vddpu down: %d\n", ret);
> - ret = 0;
> - }
> }
> }
>
>
Both this one and the [2/2] applied with ACKs from Viresh.
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists