Re: [PATCH 08/21] cpuidle: use cpuidle_disabled() instead of "off"

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 09/22/2013 03:21 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> We have a routine for getting value of "off", better call that instead of using
> "off" directly.

We are in the fast path, I am not sure invoking a function here is
better than using directly the static variable.

> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> index 8c91bad..aec9029 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ int cpuidle_idle_call(void)
>  	struct cpuidle_driver *drv;
>  	int next_state, entered_state;
>  
> -	if (off)
> +	if (cpuidle_disabled())
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  
>  	if (!initialized)
> 


-- 
 <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org â Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/