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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1215347 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH V1 Resend 02/10] PM / OPP: Drop unlikely before IS_ERR(_OR_NULL)

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH V1 Resend 02/10] PM / OPP: Drop unlikely before IS_ERR(_OR_NULL) "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2015-08-28 16:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH V1 Resend 02/10] PM / OPP: Drop unlikely before  IS_ERR(_OR_NULL) Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org> - 2015-08-28 16:00 +0200
      Re: [PATCH V1 Resend 02/10] PM / OPP: Drop unlikely before IS_ERR(_OR_NULL) "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2015-08-28 16:10 +0200

#1215347 — Re: [PATCH V1 Resend 02/10] PM / OPP: Drop unlikely before IS_ERR(_OR_NULL)

On Wednesday, August 12, 2015 03:59:39 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> IS_ERR(_OR_NULL) already contain an 'unlikely' compiler flag and there
> is no need to do that again from its callers. Drop it.
> 
> Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

Did that go anywhere or should I apply it?

> ---
>  drivers/base/power/opp.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/opp.c b/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> index 51b220e615d3..97c31170437d 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/opp.c
> @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ static struct device_opp *_find_device_opp(struct device *dev)
>  {
>  	struct device_opp *dev_opp;
>  
> -	if (unlikely(IS_ERR_OR_NULL(dev))) {
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(dev)) {
>  		pr_err("%s: Invalid parameters\n", __func__);
>  		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>  	}
> @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ unsigned long dev_pm_opp_get_voltage(struct dev_pm_opp *opp)
>  	opp_rcu_lockdep_assert();
>  
>  	tmp_opp = rcu_dereference(opp);
> -	if (unlikely(IS_ERR_OR_NULL(tmp_opp)) || !tmp_opp->available)
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(tmp_opp) || !tmp_opp->available)
>  		pr_err("%s: Invalid parameters\n", __func__);
>  	else
>  		v = tmp_opp->u_volt;
> @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ unsigned long dev_pm_opp_get_freq(struct dev_pm_opp *opp)
>  	opp_rcu_lockdep_assert();
>  
>  	tmp_opp = rcu_dereference(opp);
> -	if (unlikely(IS_ERR_OR_NULL(tmp_opp)) || !tmp_opp->available)
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(tmp_opp) || !tmp_opp->available)
>  		pr_err("%s: Invalid parameters\n", __func__);
>  	else
>  		f = tmp_opp->rate;
> 

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1215348 — Re: [PATCH V1 Resend 02/10] PM / OPP: Drop unlikely before IS_ERR(_OR_NULL)

On Fri, 28 Aug 2015, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> > IS_ERR(_OR_NULL) already contain an 'unlikely' compiler flag and there
> > is no need to do that again from its callers. Drop it.
> > 
> > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
> > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> 
> Did that go anywhere or should I apply it?

I didn't take it yet, so feel free to do so if you want.

With series like this, I usually wait a couple weeks and the pick the ones 
which haven't been picked into maintainer trees (I check that by looking 
for its presence in linux-next) through trivial.git afterwards.

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1215355

On Friday, August 28, 2015 03:52:46 PM Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2015, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > > IS_ERR(_OR_NULL) already contain an 'unlikely' compiler flag and there
> > > is no need to do that again from its callers. Drop it.
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
> > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> > 
> > Did that go anywhere or should I apply it?
> 
> I didn't take it yet, so feel free to do so if you want.
> 
> With series like this, I usually wait a couple weeks and the pick the ones 
> which haven't been picked into maintainer trees (I check that by looking 
> for its presence in linux-next) through trivial.git afterwards.

OK, I'll apply it then, thanks!

Rafael

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web