Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Use list_is_last() to check last entry of the policy list
From: Juri Lelli <hidden>
Date: 2016-01-27 10:10:56
Also in:
lkml
On 27/01/16 11:39, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:18:24AM +0000, Juri Lelli wrote:quoted
Hi, On 25/01/16 15:20, Viresh Kumar wrote:quoted
On 25-01-16, 15:16, Gautham R. Shenoy wrote:quoted
Currently next_policy() explicitly checks if a policy is the last policy in the cpufreq_policy_list. Use the standard list_is_last primitive instead. Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Gautham R. Shenoy <redacted> --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c index 78b1e2f..b3059a3 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c@@ -67,11 +67,11 @@ static struct cpufreq_policy *next_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, { lockdep_assert_held(&cpufreq_driver_lock);Which branch is this patch based on?My bad! This is based on your branch git://linux-arm.org/linux-jl.git upstream/cpufreq_cleanups. I found this issue while reviewing your cleanup patches.
No problem, and thanks for reviewing those! Any feedback? :) Best, - Juri