From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: governor: CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP never fails Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 08:44:16 +0530 Message-ID: <20160513031416.GB3415@vireshk-i7> References: <4540082.RMPf3KxPDh@vostro.rjw.lan> <2034165.RqMO62khMb@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.220.45]:33564 "EHLO mail-pa0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753283AbcEMDOT (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2016 23:14:19 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id xk12so36116276pac.0 for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 20:14:19 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2034165.RqMO62khMb@vostro.rjw.lan> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux PM list , Srinivas Pandruvada , Linux Kernel Mailing List On 12-05-16, 15:14, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > None of the cpufreq governors currently in the tree will ever fail > an invocation of the ->governor() callback with the event argument > equal to CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP (unless invoked with incorrect arguments > which doesn't matter anyway) and it is rather difficult to imagine > a valid reason for such a failure. > > Accordingly, rearrange the code in the core to make it clear that > this call never fails. > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 40 +++++++++++----------------------------- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) Acked-by: Viresh Kumar -- viresh