On Monday, December 17, 2012 10:46:07 AM Sivaram Nair wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 08:56:45AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Monday, December 17, 2012 09:38:15 AM Sivaram Nair wrote: > > > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 01:03:02AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Friday, December 14, 2012 03:17:37 PM Sivaram Nair wrote: > > > > > cpuidle_state->power_usage is signed; so change the corresponding > > > > > sysfs > > > > > ops to output signed value instead of unsigned. > > > > > > > > What's actually wrong with printing it as an unsigned int? > > > > > > power_usage could have negative values (for example cpuidle/driver.c > > > inits this value to -1, -2 etc. when drv->power_specified is not set) and > > > these shows up badly in the sysfs output. > > > > Does "badly" mean "as big positive numbers"? > > Yes (sorry for not being clearer). > > > > > Should we actually print them at all in those case? Perhaps it'll be > > better to > > make the file appear empty then? > > May be, but why is power_usage signed in the first place?
Please read the comment in driver.c:set_power_states() for the answer. :-) > I also noticed > Daniel Lezcano's patches that reduces the scope of this variable. So, > perhaps we can just ignore this change. OK Rafael -- 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 majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
