From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753298AbcEMDNx (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2016 23:13:53 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f173.google.com ([209.85.192.173]:34346 "EHLO mail-pf0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752698AbcEMDNw (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2016 23:13:52 -0400 Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 08:43:48 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux PM list , Srinivas Pandruvada , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: governor: CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT never fails Message-ID: <20160513031348.GA3415@vireshk-i7> References: <4540082.RMPf3KxPDh@vostro.rjw.lan> <10942818.DP54y8SPGY@vostro.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <10942818.DP54y8SPGY@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12-05-16, 15:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > None of the cpufreq governors currently in the tree will ever fail > an invocation of the ->governor() callback with the event argument > equal to CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT (unless invoked with incorrect > arguments which doesn't matter anyway) and it wouldn't really > make sense to fail it, because the caller won't be able to handle > that failure in a meaningful way. > > Accordingly, rearrange the code in the core to make it clear that > this call never fails. > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 35 ++++++++++++----------------------- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) Acked-by: Viresh Kumar -- viresh