Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: governor: CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP never fails

2016-05-12 Thread Viresh Kumar
On 12-05-16, 15:14, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > None of the cpufreq governors currently in the tree will ever fail > an invocation of the ->governor() callback with the event argument > equal to CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP (unless invoked with

Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: governor: CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP never fails

2016-05-12 Thread Viresh Kumar
On 12-05-16, 15:14, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > None of the cpufreq governors currently in the tree will ever fail > an invocation of the ->governor() callback with the event argument > equal to CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP (unless invoked with incorrect arguments > which doesn't

[PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: governor: CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP never fails

2016-05-12 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
From: Rafael J. Wysocki None of the cpufreq governors currently in the tree will ever fail an invocation of the ->governor() callback with the event argument equal to CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP (unless invoked with incorrect arguments which doesn't matter anyway) and it is

[PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: governor: CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP never fails

2016-05-12 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
From: Rafael J. Wysocki None of the cpufreq governors currently in the tree will ever fail an invocation of the ->governor() callback with the event argument equal to CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP (unless invoked with incorrect arguments which doesn't matter anyway) and it is rather difficult to imagine a