| Message ID | 2d6d59c2b0654872a32a9b63874b750e6b808cb5.1444583718.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 10/11/2015 10:21 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > We just made sure policy->cpu is online and this check will always fail > as the policy is active. Drop it. > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 7 ------- > 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > index 58aabe0f2d2c..4fa2215cc6ec 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > @@ -843,18 +843,11 @@ static ssize_t store(struct kobject *kobj, struct attribute *attr, > > down_write(&policy->rwsem); > > - /* Updating inactive policies is invalid, so avoid doing that. */ > - if (unlikely(policy_is_inactive(policy))) { > - ret = -EBUSY; > - goto unlock_policy_rwsem; > - } > - > if (fattr->store) > ret = fattr->store(policy, buf, count); > else > ret = -EIO; > > -unlock_policy_rwsem: > up_write(&policy->rwsem); > unlock: > put_online_cpus(); > Doesn't really seem related to the sysfs reorg/clean up. Should it be a separate patch outside of this series? Acked-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> -Saravana
On 12-10-15, 12:35, Saravana Kannan wrote: > Doesn't really seem related to the sysfs reorg/clean up. Should it > be a separate patch outside of this series? Sent it separately now .. > Acked-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> A reviewed-by would have been more appropriate here though.
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c index 58aabe0f2d2c..4fa2215cc6ec 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -843,18 +843,11 @@ static ssize_t store(struct kobject *kobj, struct attribute *attr, down_write(&policy->rwsem); - /* Updating inactive policies is invalid, so avoid doing that. */ - if (unlikely(policy_is_inactive(policy))) { - ret = -EBUSY; - goto unlock_policy_rwsem; - } - if (fattr->store) ret = fattr->store(policy, buf, count); else ret = -EIO; -unlock_policy_rwsem: up_write(&policy->rwsem); unlock: put_online_cpus();
We just made sure policy->cpu is online and this check will always fail as the policy is active. Drop it. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 7 ------- 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)