On Tuesday 02 of October 2012 14:27:17 Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 10/02/2012 04:08 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 of September 2012 18:34:31 Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> >> On 09/30/2012 12:07 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, September 29, 2012, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> >>>> On 09/29/2012 11:41 AM, Francesco Lavra wrote:
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>> Hi Francesco,
> >>>>
> >>>> thanks for reviewing the patch.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> static ssize_t show_current_driver(struct device *dev,
> >>>>>> struct device_attribute *attr,
> >>>>>> char *buf)
> >>>>>> {
> >>>>>> - ssize_t ret;
> >>>>>> - struct cpuidle_driver *cpuidle_driver = cpuidle_get_driver();
> >>>>>> + struct cbarg cbarg = { .buf = buf };
> >>>>> cbarg.count should be initialized to 0.
> >>>> Actually, with this initialization, all the fields will be initialized
> >>>> to 0, except 'buf'.
> >>> However, it would be good to initialize count explicitly so as to show
> >>> that we care about the initial value of it.
> >>
> >> Ok, I will change that in a V2.
> >>
> >> Rafael, you're right, this approach makes more sense IMO.
> >
> > Well, I'm glad that you agree. :-)
> >
> > I'm sorry I haven't posted any comments about the latest series,
> > I'll do my best to review it later this week.
>
> Ok, cool. Thanks!
>
> I guess it is too late to have this material for v3.7, right ?
Yes, it is too late.
Thanks,
Rafael
---
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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
