Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: fix comment about return value of cpufreq_register_driver()

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday, February 22, 2016 10:54:46 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 20-02-16, 21:50, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > The comment has been incorrect since commit 4dea5806d332
> > ("cpufreq: return EEXIST instead of EBUSY for second registering").
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  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 e979ec7..bfefc91 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > @@ -2384,7 +2384,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpufreq_boost_enabled);
> >   * submitted by the CPU Frequency driver.
> >   *
> >   * Registers a CPU Frequency driver to this core code. This code
> > - * returns zero on success, -EBUSY when another driver got here first
> > + * returns zero on success, -EEXIST when another driver got here first
> >   * (and isn't unregistered in the meantime).
> >   *
> >   */
> 
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>

Queued up for 4.6, thanks!