Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1418279

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: governor: Drop gov_cancel_work()

From "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: governor: Drop gov_cancel_work()
Date 2016-06-09 14:30 +0200
Message-ID <rI7fX-6hH-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <rHVou-6Nf-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <rHYPn-Ey-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 5:21 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 09-06-16, 01:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>>
>> There's no reason for gov_cancel_work() to exist at all, as it only
>> has one caller and the only thing done by that caller is to invoke
>> gov_cancel_work().
>>
>> Accordingly, drop gov_cancel_work() and move its contents to the
>> caller.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c |   19 +++++++------------
>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

Thanks!

> I am wondering what happened to your other patches around the governor callbacks
> and why weren't they applied yet :)

They are in linux-next now, aren't they?

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH] cpufreq: governor: Drop gov_cancel_work() "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2016-06-09 01:50 +0200
  Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: governor: Drop gov_cancel_work() Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-06-09 05:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: governor: Drop gov_cancel_work() "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2016-06-09 14:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: governor: Drop gov_cancel_work() Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-06-10 05:00 +0200

csiph-web