linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: Fix a comment in cpufreq_policy

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]

Message-ID: <20211201042245.amxgyevar6gjbkfb@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Wed, 1 Dec 2021 09:52:45 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Tang Yizhou <tangyizhou@...wei.com>
Cc:     rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, rafael@...nel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: Fix a comment in cpufreq_policy_free

On 30-11-21, 23:15, Tang Yizhou wrote:
> The comment is inconsistent with the block_notifier_call_chain() call,
> so fix it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tang Yizhou <tangyizhou@...wei.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index e338d2f010fe..8f753675e4a2 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1296,7 +1296,7 @@ static void cpufreq_policy_free(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  
>  	if (policy->max_freq_req) {
>  		/*
> -		 * CPUFREQ_CREATE_POLICY notification is sent only after
> +		 * CPUFREQ_REMOVE_POLICY notification is sent only after

No, the earlier comment is correct. It says when the CREATE notification was
sent and so we need to do the remove here before removing max_freq_req.

>  		 * successfully adding max_freq_req request.
>  		 */
>  		blocking_notifier_call_chain(&cpufreq_policy_notifier_list,
> -- 
> 2.17.1

-- 
viresh