On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 03:50:05 PM Paul Walmsley wrote: > On 11/25/2013 09:03 PM, viresh kumar wrote: > > On Tuesday 26 November 2013 07:31 AM, Paul Walmsley wrote: > >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c > >> index d4585ce2346c..0faf756f6197 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c > >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c > >> @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, > >> unsigned int index) > >> int ret; > >> > >> freq_Hz = clk_round_rate(cpu_clk, freq_table[index].frequency * 1000); > >> - if (freq_Hz < 0) > >> + if (freq_Hz <= 0) > >> freq_Hz = freq_table[index].frequency * 1000; > >> > >> freq_exact = freq_Hz; > > So, we will see another patch where you will do: s/<=/== ?? > > Probably so for this driver - along with converting the type of freq_Hz > to be u64 or unsigned long. Not sure yet about all of the other > drivers, since many of them are unlikely to see rates above (2^31)-1 Hz. > > > I am wondering if there is any other way we can get this solved, i.e. in a > > single patchset. > > I'm trying to avoid sending up a large series that touches drivers all > over the tree :-( > > > Otherwise, for both SPEAr and cpu0 patches: > > > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Thanks! But I was instead hoping you might queue them up for merging > for v3.14? That should greatly reduce the risk of merge conflicts. I have a plan to queue them up for 3.14. :-) Thanks! -- 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
