Igor Grinberg <[email protected]> writes: > Hi Kevin, Nishanth, > > On 06/01/12 02:15, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> Nishanth Menon <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> Commit 9fa2df6b90786301b175e264f5fa9846aba81a65 >>> (ARM: OMAP2+: OPP: allow OPP enumeration to continue if device is not >>> present) >>> makes the logic: >>> for (i = 0; i < opp_def_size; i++) { >>> <snip> >>> if (!oh || !oh->od) { >>> <snip> >>> continue; >>> } >>> <snip> >>> opp_def++; >>> } >>> >>> In short, the moment we hit a "Bad OPP", we end up looping the list >>> comparing against the bad opp definition pointer for the rest of the >>> iteration count. Instead, increment opp_def in the for loop itself >>> and allow continue to be used in code without much thought so that >>> we check the next set of OPP definition pointers :) >>> >>> Cc: Kevin Hilman <[email protected]> >>> Cc: Steve Sakoman <[email protected]> >>> Cc: Tony Lindgren <[email protected]> >>> Cc: [email protected] >>> Cc: [email protected] >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <[email protected]> >> >> Good catch. >> >> Queuing for my next set of PM fixes for v3.5-rc (branch: for_3.5/fixes/pm-2) > > I think this should also apply for stable, right? > If it should, can you please add a > Cc: [email protected]
Yes, added. Thanks, Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
