Hi Rafael,
On 2020/5/18 19:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:56 PM Serge Semin
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:51:15PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:46 PM Serge Semin
>>> wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:41:19PM
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:56 PM Serge Semin
wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:51:15PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:46 PM Serge Semin
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:41:19PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Monday, May 18, 2020
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:51:15PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:46 PM Serge Semin
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:41:19PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, May 18, 2020 12:31:02 PM CEST Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:46 PM Serge Semin
wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:41:19PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, May 18, 2020 12:31:02 PM CEST Serge Semin wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 03:54:15PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > > On 18-05-20, 12:22, Rafael J.
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:41:19PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, May 18, 2020 12:31:02 PM CEST Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 03:54:15PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 18-05-20, 12:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Monday, May 18, 2020 12:11:09 PM CEST
On Monday, May 18, 2020 12:31:02 PM CEST Serge Semin wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 03:54:15PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 18-05-20, 12:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, May 18, 2020 12:11:09 PM CEST Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > > On 18-05-20, 11:53, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 03:54:15PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 18-05-20, 12:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, May 18, 2020 12:11:09 PM CEST Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 18-05-20, 11:53, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > That said if you really only want it to return 0 on success, you
On 18-05-20, 12:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, May 18, 2020 12:11:09 PM CEST Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 18-05-20, 11:53, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > That said if you really only want it to return 0 on success, you may as
> > > well
> > > add a ret = 0; statement (with a comment
On Monday, May 18, 2020 12:11:09 PM CEST Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 18-05-20, 11:53, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > That said if you really only want it to return 0 on success, you may as well
> > add a ret = 0; statement (with a comment explaining why it is needed) after
> > the last break in the
On 18-05-20, 11:53, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> That said if you really only want it to return 0 on success, you may as well
> add a ret = 0; statement (with a comment explaining why it is needed) after
> the last break in the loop.
That can be done as well, but will be a bit less efficient as the
On 5/18/2020 9:41 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 16-05-20, 15:52, Serge Semin wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 05:58:47PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
@@ -2554,7 +2554,7 @@ static int cpufreq_boost_set_sw(int state)
break;
}
- return ret;
+ return ret <
On 16-05-20, 15:52, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 05:58:47PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > @@ -2554,7 +2554,7 @@ static int cpufreq_boost_set_sw(int state)
> > > break;
> > > }
> > > - return ret;
> > > + return ret < 0 ? ret : 0;
> > >
Hello Rafael,
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 05:58:47PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On 5/6/2020 7:42 PM, sergey.se...@baikalelectronics.ru wrote:
> > From: Serge Semin
> >
> > Recent commit e61a41256edf ("cpufreq: dev_pm_qos_update_request() can
> > return 1 on success") fixed a problem when
On 5/6/2020 7:42 PM, sergey.se...@baikalelectronics.ru wrote:
From: Serge Semin
Recent commit e61a41256edf ("cpufreq: dev_pm_qos_update_request() can
return 1 on success") fixed a problem when active policies traverse
was falsely stopped due to invalidly treating the non-zero return value
from
From: Serge Semin
Recent commit e61a41256edf ("cpufreq: dev_pm_qos_update_request() can
return 1 on success") fixed a problem when active policies traverse
was falsely stopped due to invalidly treating the non-zero return value
from freq_qos_update_request() method as an error. Yes, that
15 matches
Mail list logo