On Friday, July 22, 2016 02:28:52 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 22-07-16, 23:31, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > cpufreq.c
> > >
> > > if (policy->governor->max_transition_latency &&
> > > policy->cpuinfo.transition_latency >
> > > policy->governor->max_transition_latency) {
> > >
> > > - And this check will always fail, unless max_transition_latency is zero.
> >
> > Why would it fail? If governor->max_transition_latency is non-zero, but less
> > than UNIT_MAX, the condition checked will be true to my eyes.
>
> Bad wording. Sorry.
>
> I meant, this 'if' check will always succeed (as you also noted), and
> so we will always get the error message reported in this patch.
Not always, but for drivers setting cpuinfo.transition_latency to CPUFREQ_ETERNAL.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html