On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 27-07-15, 16:09, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> >>> >>> To separate the CPU online interface from the CPU device removal >>> one, >> >> Why do you call this cpu device removal code? > > By mistake. > > Of course, that should be addition/registration. > >>> split cpufreq_online() out of cpufreq_add_dev() and make >>> cpufreq_cpu_callback() call the former, while the latter will only >>> be used as the CPU device removal subsystem interface callback. >>> >>> While at it, notice that the return value of sif->add_dev() is >>> ignored in bus_probe_device(), so (the new) cpufreq_add_dev() >>> doesn't need to bother with returning anything different from 0 >>> and cpufreq_online() may be a void function. >> >> That is going to change in 4.3: >> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/26/132 > > There are some problems with access to klml.org today and I'm not sure > what you mean. > > Can you explain your points in addition to sending links to stuff, please?
OK, I've just seen that patch, but it doesn't modify bus_probe_device() AFAICS. Plus we also ignore the return value of cpufreq_add_dev() in the hotplug notifier callback. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
