On Saturday 20 of October 2012 01:42:05 Viresh Kumar wrote:
> There is no need to do cpufreq_get_cpu() and cpufreq_put_cpu() for drivers that
> don't support getavg() routine.
>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
The patch doesn't seem to follow the changelog or the other way around.
Thanks,
Rafael
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 85df538..f552d5f 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1511,12 +1511,14 @@ int __cpufreq_driver_getavg(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu)
> {
> int ret = 0;
>
> + if (!(cpu_online(cpu) && cpufreq_driver->getavg))
> + return 0;
> +
> policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(policy->cpu);
> if (!policy)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - if (cpu_online(cpu) && cpufreq_driver->getavg)
> - ret = cpufreq_driver->getavg(policy, cpu);
> + ret = cpufreq_driver->getavg(policy, cpu);
>
> cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> return ret;
>
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
