| Message ID | 2369979.ElGaqSPkdT@rjwysocki.net |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | PM: EM: Two cleanups related to em_check_capacity_update() | expand |
On 1/27/25 13:37, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > > The max_cap parameter is never used in em_adjust_new_capacity(), so > drop it. > > No functional impact. > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > --- > kernel/power/energy_model.c | 5 ++--- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > --- a/kernel/power/energy_model.c > +++ b/kernel/power/energy_model.c > @@ -728,8 +728,7 @@ > * are correctly calculated. > */ > static void em_adjust_new_capacity(struct device *dev, > - struct em_perf_domain *pd, > - u64 max_cap) > + struct em_perf_domain *pd) > { > struct em_perf_table __rcu *em_table; > > @@ -800,7 +799,7 @@ > cpu, cpu_capacity, em_max_perf); > > dev = get_cpu_device(cpu); > - em_adjust_new_capacity(dev, pd, cpu_capacity); > + em_adjust_new_capacity(dev, pd); > } > > free_cpumask_var(cpu_done_mask); > > > LGTM Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
--- a/kernel/power/energy_model.c +++ b/kernel/power/energy_model.c @@ -728,8 +728,7 @@ * are correctly calculated. */ static void em_adjust_new_capacity(struct device *dev, - struct em_perf_domain *pd, - u64 max_cap) + struct em_perf_domain *pd) { struct em_perf_table __rcu *em_table; @@ -800,7 +799,7 @@ cpu, cpu_capacity, em_max_perf); dev = get_cpu_device(cpu); - em_adjust_new_capacity(dev, pd, cpu_capacity); + em_adjust_new_capacity(dev, pd); } free_cpumask_var(cpu_done_mask);