On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 6:52 AM Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 01-07-20, 12:20, Xin Hao wrote: > > The 'caps' variable has been defined, so there is no need to get > > 'highest_perf' value through 'cpu->caps.highest_perf', you can use > > 'caps->highest_perf' instead. > > > > Signed-off-by: Xin Hao <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > > index 257d726a4456..051d0e56c67a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c > > @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ static unsigned int cppc_cpufreq_perf_to_khz(struct > > cppc_cpudata *cpu, > > if (!max_khz) > > max_khz = cppc_get_dmi_max_khz(); > > mul = max_khz; > > - div = cpu->perf_caps.highest_perf; > > + div = caps->highest_perf; > > } > > return (u64)perf * mul / div; > > } > > @@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ static unsigned int cppc_cpufreq_khz_to_perf(struct > > cppc_cpudata *cpu, > > } else { > > if (!max_khz) > > max_khz = cppc_get_dmi_max_khz(); > > - mul = cpu->perf_caps.highest_perf; > > + mul = caps->highest_perf; > > div = max_khz; > > } > > Applied. Thanks.
I applied the previous cppc_cpufreq patch, hopefully it will not clash with this one. Are you going to take care of this driver going forward?
