Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41613C433EF for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 19:04:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1351888AbhLATHl (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2021 14:07:41 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-f42.google.com ([209.85.210.42]:46744 "EHLO mail-ot1-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S245035AbhLATHg (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2021 14:07:36 -0500 Received: by mail-ot1-f42.google.com with SMTP id x3-20020a05683000c300b0057a5318c517so6368559oto.13; Wed, 01 Dec 2021 11:04:15 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OXOpIccpsM1xV4j3I4ZBrPV6IQID71PePtRAf33/2Rc=; b=nOpzLfr/HiJNeFuLH4/11bxp5T19Yu3fUD/WqBH3WauM6W1nXDx8+9VOAQSQF3EZyn +UWQ5VGkJffQziXicq9qZ7mDg0fQUUHoQkgTA+7Ndd7ea43ScaSaaiYLlpY+n4Xqtwi4 gI1qn84CqTt8/FjqqMP4lbu62qPtE6J+xpLRdxZ8jbAfFLvtMbUc4XbUCIYXkaAv2IqW m7nsGqmAsTLgvnMBFjLvIzFju7lCqMOdW7cok2BQkRGIyzN6DMk5u97Wk0F/StW05een 6qSq4hQvYMUxeMQ6zCA+gQRmrcpGsN369lHkgfu4LLFy6gz4ZSQd8Kn9Pu68VqXcuLaK Rm0g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532f22l5weqSVk4YBSY39YadaW/EucMcmF35SXKHIiTMMNbhhXmC Ui1uWka5JtK0BvW1F3WlVCV3FJAoGdV5Yzy0dj4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw1YfGGYYwx1+loOW9w5nC4XINsp9fsj7CRMK5dRriZXo7+i/joPN4ikcDi+O7lWtw9F23LkkFVbLAfpsjukbA= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4c10:: with SMTP id l16mr7378988otf.198.1638385454922; Wed, 01 Dec 2021 11:04:14 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211201074021.18097-1-tangyizhou@huawei.com> <20211201074021.18097-2-tangyizhou@huawei.com> <20211201071937.e6uso2qwzgtbfest@vireshk-i7> In-Reply-To: <20211201071937.e6uso2qwzgtbfest@vireshk-i7> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 20:04:04 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] cpufreq: Fix a comment in cpufreq_policy_free To: Viresh Kumar , Tang Yizhou Cc: Rafael Wysocki , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux PM , Linux Kernel Mailing List , zhengbin13@huawei.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 8:19 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 01-12-21, 15:40, Tang Yizhou wrote: > > Make the comment of blocking_notifier_call_chain() easier to > > understand. > > > > Signed-off-by: Tang Yizhou > > --- > > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 5 +++-- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > > index e338d2f010fe..db0b4b4258d5 100644 > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > > @@ -1296,8 +1296,9 @@ static void cpufreq_policy_free(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > > > > if (policy->max_freq_req) { > > /* > > - * CPUFREQ_CREATE_POLICY notification is sent only after > > - * successfully adding max_freq_req request. > > + * Remove max_freq_req after sending CPUFREQ_REMOVE_POLICY > > + * notification, since CPUFREQ_CREATE_POLICY notification was > > + * sent after adding max_freq_req earlier. > > */ > > blocking_notifier_call_chain(&cpufreq_policy_notifier_list, > > CPUFREQ_REMOVE_POLICY, policy); > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar Applied as 5.16-rc material along with the [2/2[, thanks!