Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 17 Feb 2014 10:44:54 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: Return error if ->get() failed in cpufreq_update_policy() | From | Viresh Kumar <> |
| |
On 17 February 2014 05:58, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > On Friday, February 14, 2014 04:30:40 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Good to know that you chat with each other, but it really is not a useful piece > of information until you say what *exactly* you were talking about.
All that is mentioned in commit logs of both the patches :) .. That's all we discussed.
>> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 7 +++++++ >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c >> index 08ca8c9..383362b 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c >> @@ -2151,6 +2151,13 @@ int cpufreq_update_policy(unsigned int cpu) >> */ >> if (cpufreq_driver->get) { >> new_policy.cur = cpufreq_driver->get(cpu); >> + >> + if (!new_policy.cur) { >> + pr_err("%s: ->get() returned 0 KHz\n", __func__); >> + ret = -EINVAL; > > That isn't -EINVAL. It may be -EIO or -ENODEV, but not -EINVAL. Please.
Hmm.. Correct. I will use EIO then..
>> + goto no_policy; > > And is it unsafe to continue here? Or can we continue regardless of getting 0?
We were supposed to set this frequency as the current frequency in policy->cur, what else can we do now in this function when we aren't able to read current freq? And so I thought that's all we can do here.
>> + } >> + >> if (!policy->cur) { >> pr_debug("Driver did not initialize current freq"); >> policy->cur = new_policy.cur; >> > > -- > I speak only for myself. > Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
| |