On 12 September 2013 11:51, Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.b...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > That said, indeed currently there is no code in cpufreq that invokes the > function with last == new. So its not like we are masking an existing bug with > this patch. If you like, perhaps we can change this patch to print a warning > when it gets input values with last == new? That prevents disasters and also > warns when some code is buggy. Sounds like a win-win.
Exactly what I thought while I was midway reading your mail :) Probably a WARN().. So that we don't miss any other bugs :) -- 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/
