Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 26 Nov 2013 15:50:05 -0800 | From | Paul Walmsley <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: cpufreq-cpu0: clk_round_rate() can return a zero upon error |
| |
On 11/25/2013 09:03 PM, viresh kumar wrote: > On Tuesday 26 November 2013 07:31 AM, Paul Walmsley wrote: >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c >> index d4585ce2346c..0faf756f6197 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c >> @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, >> unsigned int index) >> int ret; >> >> freq_Hz = clk_round_rate(cpu_clk, freq_table[index].frequency * 1000); >> - if (freq_Hz < 0) >> + if (freq_Hz <= 0) >> freq_Hz = freq_table[index].frequency * 1000; >> >> freq_exact = freq_Hz; > So, we will see another patch where you will do: s/<=/== ??
Probably so for this driver - along with converting the type of freq_Hz to be u64 or unsigned long. Not sure yet about all of the other drivers, since many of them are unlikely to see rates above (2^31)-1 Hz.
> I am wondering if there is any other way we can get this solved, i.e. in a > single patchset.
I'm trying to avoid sending up a large series that touches drivers all over the tree :-(
> Otherwise, for both SPEAr and cpu0 patches: > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Thanks! But I was instead hoping you might queue them up for merging for v3.14? That should greatly reduce the risk of merge conflicts.
- Paul
| |