On 10/11/2015 10:21 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org>
The commit text should explain the why you are doing this.
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index 25c4c15103a0..b32521432db4 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1221,7 +1221,7 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
if (new_policy) {
/* related_cpus should at least include policy->cpus. */
- cpumask_or(policy->related_cpus, policy->related_cpus,
policy->cpus);
+ cpumask_copy(policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus);
Again, why? It actually seems wrong. A 4 core cluster could come up with
just 2 cores when the policy is added. But the related CPUs would be 4 CPUs.
/* Remember CPUs present at the policy creation time. */
cpumask_and(policy->real_cpus, policy->cpus, cpu_present_mask);
}
-Saravana
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
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/
