From d6ff44d647a9c63911983da9979961fde306b3aa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 00:59:27 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: governor: CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS never fails 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_LIMITS (unless invoked with incorrect arguments which doesn't matter anyway) and had it ever failed, the result of it wouldn't have been very clean. For this reason, rearrange the code in the core to ignore the return value of cpufreq_governor() when called with event equal to CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki Acked-by: Viresh Kumar --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c index 36bc11a106aa..e3e666109e21 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -2054,7 +2054,11 @@ static int cpufreq_start_governor(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) cpufreq_update_current_freq(policy); ret = cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_START); - return ret ? ret : cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS); + if (ret) + return ret; + + cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS); + return 0; } int cpufreq_register_governor(struct cpufreq_governor *governor) @@ -2195,7 +2199,8 @@ static int cpufreq_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, if (new_policy->governor == policy->governor) { pr_debug("cpufreq: governor limits update\n"); - return cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS); + cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS); + return 0; } pr_debug("governor switch\n");