Re: [PATCH 5/5] cpufreq: Drop redundant check for inactive policies

[Saravana Kannan]

On 10/11/2015 10:21 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> We just made sure policy->cpu is online and this check will always fail
> as the policy is active. Drop it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 7 -------
>   1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 58aabe0f2d2c..4fa2215cc6ec 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -843,18 +843,11 @@ static ssize_t store(struct kobject *kobj, struct attribute *attr,
>
>   	down_write(&policy->rwsem);
>
> -	/* Updating inactive policies is invalid, so avoid doing that. */
> -	if (unlikely(policy_is_inactive(policy))) {
> -		ret = -EBUSY;
> -		goto unlock_policy_rwsem;
> -	}
> -
>   	if (fattr->store)
>   		ret = fattr->store(policy, buf, count);
>   	else
>   		ret = -EIO;
>
> -unlock_policy_rwsem:
>   	up_write(&policy->rwsem);
>   unlock:
>   	put_online_cpus();

Doesn't really seem related to the sysfs reorg/clean up. Should it be a 
separate patch outside of this series?

Acked-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

-Saravana

--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
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/