| Message ID | 2095cb9de80d87867dbfa42f8433f766891c93ab.1375191318.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 30 July 2013 19:28, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote: > On Tuesday, July 30, 2013 07:06:33 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: >> We call cpufreq_cpu_get() in cpufreq_add_dev_symlink() to increase usage >> refcount of policy and not to get policy for a cpu. So, we don't really need to >> capture the return value of this routine and call put for it later for failure >> cases. We can simply use policy passed as an argument to this routine. >> >> Moreover debug print is rewritten to make it more clear. >> >> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> > > Both [1-2/2] look good, but what do they apply to? Mainline, linux-next, > my bleeding-edge branch? Sorry for not mentioning this, bleeding-edge :)
On Tuesday, July 30, 2013 07:06:33 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > We call cpufreq_cpu_get() in cpufreq_add_dev_symlink() to increase usage > refcount of policy and not to get policy for a cpu. So, we don't really need to > capture the return value of this routine and call put for it later for failure > cases. We can simply use policy passed as an argument to this routine. > > Moreover debug print is rewritten to make it more clear. > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Both [1-2/2] look good, but what do they apply to? Mainline, linux-next, my bleeding-edge branch? Rafael > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 7 +++---- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > index 170d344..35e1a03 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > @@ -813,19 +813,18 @@ static int cpufreq_add_dev_symlink(unsigned int cpu, > int ret = 0; > > for_each_cpu(j, policy->cpus) { > - struct cpufreq_policy *managed_policy; > struct device *cpu_dev; > > if (j == cpu) > continue; > > - pr_debug("CPU %u already managed, adding link\n", j); > - managed_policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); > + pr_debug("Adding link for CPU: %u\n", j); > + cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); > cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(j); > ret = sysfs_create_link(&cpu_dev->kobj, &policy->kobj, > "cpufreq"); > if (ret) { > - cpufreq_cpu_put(managed_policy); > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); > return ret; > } > } >
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c index 170d344..35e1a03 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -813,19 +813,18 @@ static int cpufreq_add_dev_symlink(unsigned int cpu, int ret = 0; for_each_cpu(j, policy->cpus) { - struct cpufreq_policy *managed_policy; struct device *cpu_dev; if (j == cpu) continue; - pr_debug("CPU %u already managed, adding link\n", j); - managed_policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); + pr_debug("Adding link for CPU: %u\n", j); + cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(j); ret = sysfs_create_link(&cpu_dev->kobj, &policy->kobj, "cpufreq"); if (ret) { - cpufreq_cpu_put(managed_policy); + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); return ret; } }
We call cpufreq_cpu_get() in cpufreq_add_dev_symlink() to increase usage refcount of policy and not to get policy for a cpu. So, we don't really need to capture the return value of this routine and call put for it later for failure cases. We can simply use policy passed as an argument to this routine. Moreover debug print is rewritten to make it more clear. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 7 +++---- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)