[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bgxodgc7glo2hwbam5lmj6fo3x7ngoymncxydm2bduf3aoz22q@uri54qj4q6ju>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 09:13:59 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Lifeng Zheng <zhenglifeng1@...wei.com>
Cc: rafael@...nel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxarm@...wei.com, jonathan.cameron@...wei.com,
zhanjie9@...ilicon.com, lihuisong@...wei.com, yubowen8@...wei.com,
zhangpengjie2@...wei.com, wangzhi12@...wei.com, linhongye@...artners.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] cpufreq: Return -EOPNOTSUPP if no policy is boost
supported
On 28-11-25, 17:13, Lifeng Zheng wrote:
> In cpufreq_boost_trigger_state(), if all the policies are boost
> unsupported, policy_set_boost() will not be called and this function will
> return 0. But it is better to return an error to indicate that the platform
> doesn't support boost.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lifeng Zheng <zhenglifeng1@...wei.com>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index e8d7544b77b8..a4399e5490da 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -2806,7 +2806,7 @@ static int cpufreq_boost_trigger_state(int state)
> {
> struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> unsigned long flags;
> - int ret = 0;
> + int ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>
> /*
> * Don't compare 'cpufreq_driver->boost_enabled' with 'state' here to
> @@ -2826,6 +2826,10 @@ static int cpufreq_boost_trigger_state(int state)
> if (ret)
> goto err_reset_state;
> }
> +
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_reset_state;
> +
> cpus_read_unlock();
>
> return 0;
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists