[PATCH V2 1/5] cpufreq: Use cpumask_copy instead of cpumask_or to copy a mask

[Viresh Kumar]

->related_cpus is empty at this point of time and copying ->cpus to it
or orring ->related_cpus with ->cpus would result in the same value. But
cpumask_copy makes it rather clear.

Reviewed-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index 8701dc559850..16b9e811ff01 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1214,7 +1214,7 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
 
 	if (new_policy) {
 		/* related_cpus should at least include policy->cpus. */
-		cpumask_or(policy->related_cpus, policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus);
+		cpumask_copy(policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus);
 		/* Remember CPUs present at the policy creation time. */
 		cpumask_and(policy->real_cpus, policy->cpus, cpu_present_mask);
 	}
-- 
2.4.0

--
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/