Re: [PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device removal from CPU online

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 27-07-15, 16:09, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> To separate the CPU online interface from the CPU device removal
>>> one,
>>
>> Why do you call this cpu device removal code?
>
> By mistake.
>
> Of course, that should be addition/registration.
>
>>> split cpufreq_online() out of cpufreq_add_dev() and make
>>> cpufreq_cpu_callback() call the former, while the latter will only
>>> be used as the CPU device removal subsystem interface callback.
>>>
>>> While at it, notice that the return value of sif->add_dev() is
>>> ignored in bus_probe_device(), so (the new) cpufreq_add_dev()
>>> doesn't need to bother with returning anything different from 0
>>> and cpufreq_online() may be a void function.
>>
>> That is going to change in 4.3:
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/26/132
>
> There are some problems with access to klml.org today and I'm not sure
> what you mean.
>
> Can you explain your points in addition to sending links to stuff, please?

OK, I've just seen that patch, but it doesn't modify bus_probe_device() AFAICS.

Plus we also ignore the return value of cpufreq_add_dev() in the
hotplug notifier callback.

Thanks,
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/