On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 03:52:21PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> @@ -456,8 +460,6 @@ static int sugov_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>>
>> out:
>> mutex_unlock(&global_tunables_lock);
>> -
>> - cpufreq_enable_fast_switch(policy);
>> return 0;
>>
>> fail:
>> @@ -468,6 +470,10 @@ static int sugov_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>> mutex_unlock(&global_tunables_lock);
>>
>> sugov_policy_free(sg_policy);
>> +
>> + disable_fast_switch:
>> + cpufreq_disable_fast_switch(policy);
>> +
>> pr_err("initialization failed (error %d)\n", ret);
>> return ret;
>> }
>
> Argh, no indented labels please. Please fix the 3 that snuck in while
> you're there.
Well, you didn't tell me you didn't like them. :-)
Anyway, I can fix this up easily enough.
Any other concerns regarding the patch?
Thanks,
Rafael
