On Friday, October 25, 2013 11:07:40 AM Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <r...@rjwysocki.net>
> wrote:
> > On Friday, October 25, 2013 11:51:40 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > /* don't keep reloading if cpufreq_driver exists */
> > if (cpufreq_get_current_driver())
> > - return 0;
> > + return -EEXIST;
> >
> > if (acpi_disabled)
> > - return 0;
> > + return -ENODEV;
> >
> > pr_debug("acpi_cpufreq_init\n");
>
> I think:
>
> - EBUSY is a better error return than EEXIST here/
My concern about using -EBUSY here was that it might be interpreted as
"try again" by things like udev (which is not what I want to happen).
> - do the ENODEV case first, because claiming something is busy when
> you couldn't have used it anyway is kind of stupid)
Agreed.
> but yeah, this looks like the right thing. Let's make sure there
> aren't any annoying error messages etc printed out as a result of
> this, though.
Updated patch is appended.
Rafael
---
drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
@@ -986,12 +986,12 @@ static int __init acpi_cpufreq_init(void
{
int ret;
+ if (acpi_disabled)
+ return -ENODEV;
+
/* don't keep reloading if cpufreq_driver exists */
if (cpufreq_get_current_driver())
- return 0;
-
- if (acpi_disabled)
- return 0;
+ return -EEXIST;
pr_debug("acpi_cpufreq_init\n");
--
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/
