acpi_processor_errata() is only called in acpi_processor_get_info(),
and the argument 'pr' passed to acpi_processor_errata() will never be
NULL, so the if (!pr) check is unnecessary and can be removed.
Since the 'pr' argument is not used by acpi_processor_errata() any more,
so change the argument into void too.
Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 8 ++------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
index 5364d02..7ce0750 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
@@ -140,15 +140,11 @@ static int acpi_processor_errata_piix4(struct pci_dev *dev)
return 0;
}
-static int acpi_processor_errata(struct acpi_processor *pr)
+static int acpi_processor_errata(void)
{
int result = 0;
struct pci_dev *dev = NULL;
-
- if (!pr)
- return -EINVAL;
-
/*
* PIIX4
*/
@@ -220,7 +216,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device *device)
acpi_status status = AE_OK;
static int cpu0_initialized;
- acpi_processor_errata(pr);
+ acpi_processor_errata();
/*
* Check to see if we have bus mastering arbitration control. This
--
1.7.9.5
--
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
