Why is this needed? Normal C precedence rules should take care of this. No? Thanks, Venki On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 07:22 -0700, Thomas Renninger wrote: > Signed-off-by: Thomas Renninger <trenn@xxxxxxx> > Cc: <linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: <cpufreq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c > index 4475523..7948d88 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c > @@ -340,7 +340,7 @@ static unsigned int get_measured_perf(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, > > #endif > > - retval = per_cpu(drv_data, policy->cpu)->max_freq * perf_percent / 100; > + retval = (per_cpu(drv_data, policy->cpu)->max_freq * perf_percent) / 100; > > return retval; > } -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
