public inbox for linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
To: Igor Grinberg <grinberg@compulab.co.il>
Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
	linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Steve Sakoman <steve@sakoman.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: OPP: Fix to ensure check of right oppdef after bad one
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 06:54:48 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fwafuogn.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FC86926.5050404@compulab.co.il> (Igor Grinberg's message of "Fri, 01 Jun 2012 10:03:02 +0300")

Igor Grinberg <grinberg@compulab.co.il> writes:

> Hi Kevin, Nishanth,
>
> On 06/01/12 02:15, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> writes:
>> 
>>> Commit 9fa2df6b90786301b175e264f5fa9846aba81a65
>>> (ARM: OMAP2+: OPP: allow OPP enumeration to continue if device is not present)
>>> makes the logic:
>>> for (i = 0; i < opp_def_size; i++) {
>>> 	<snip>
>>> 	if (!oh || !oh->od) {
>>> 		<snip>
>>> 		continue;
>>> 	}
>>> <snip>
>>> opp_def++;
>>> }
>>>
>>> In short, the moment we hit a "Bad OPP", we end up looping the list
>>> comparing against the bad opp definition pointer for the rest of the
>>> iteration count. Instead, increment opp_def in the for loop itself
>>> and allow continue to be used in code without much thought so that
>>> we check the next set of OPP definition pointers :)
>>>
>>> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
>>> Cc: Steve Sakoman <steve@sakoman.com>
>>> Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
>>> Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
>>> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
>> 
>> Good catch.
>> 
>> Queuing for my next set of PM fixes for v3.5-rc (branch: for_3.5/fixes/pm-2)
>
> I think this should also apply for stable, right?
> If it should, can you please add a
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org

Yes, added.

Thanks,

Kevin

      parent reply	other threads:[~2012-06-01 13:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-05-18 17:26 [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: OPP: Fix to ensure check of right oppdef after bad one Nishanth Menon
2012-05-31 23:15 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-06-01  7:03   ` Igor Grinberg
2012-06-01  7:05     ` Menon, Nishanth
2012-06-01 13:54     ` Kevin Hilman [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87fwafuogn.fsf@ti.com \
    --to=khilman@ti.com \
    --cc=grinberg@compulab.co.il \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nm@ti.com \
    --cc=steve@sakoman.com \
    --cc=tony@atomide.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox