On 07/10/2014 04:50 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 10 July 2014 16:45, Srivatsa S. Bhat <sriva...@mit.edu> wrote:
>> Looks good to me. But I think it would be better to move the invocation of
>> kobject_move() to update_policy_cpu() itself, so that update_policy_cpu()
>> will do all the work involved in updating the policy->cpu, as its name 
>> suggests.
> 
> Its called from remove path as well ..
> 

I know.. That's why it makes even more sense to consolidate all the
work into one function. We can restructure cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu()
such that the kobject_move() can be moved to update_policy_cpu().

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to