linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] cpufreq: CPPC: simply the code access 'highest_perf' value in cppc_perf

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 1 Jul 2020 10:22:27 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Xin Hao <xhao@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3]  cpufreq: CPPC: simply the code access 'highest_perf'
 value in cppc_perf_caps struct

On 01-07-20, 12:20, Xin Hao wrote:
>  The 'caps' variable has been defined, so there is no need to get
>  'highest_perf' value through 'cpu->caps.highest_perf', you can use
>  'caps->highest_perf' instead.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xin Hao <xhao@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
> index 257d726a4456..051d0e56c67a 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c
> @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ static unsigned int cppc_cpufreq_perf_to_khz(struct cppc_cpudata *cpu,
>  		if (!max_khz)
>  			max_khz = cppc_get_dmi_max_khz();
>  		mul = max_khz;
> -		div = cpu->perf_caps.highest_perf;
> +		div = caps->highest_perf;
>  	}
>  	return (u64)perf * mul / div;
>  }
> @@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ static unsigned int cppc_cpufreq_khz_to_perf(struct cppc_cpudata *cpu,
>  	} else {
>  		if (!max_khz)
>  			max_khz = cppc_get_dmi_max_khz();
> -		mul = cpu->perf_caps.highest_perf;
> +		mul = caps->highest_perf;
>  		div = max_khz;
>  	}

Applied. Thanks.

-- 
viresh