On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 3:23 PM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezc...@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> The functions stub already exist for the condition the IS_ENABLED
> is trying to avoid.
>
> Remove the IS_ENABLED macros as they are pointless.
AFAICS, the IS_ENABLED checks are an optimization to avoid generating
pointless code (including a branch) in case CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL is not
set.
Why do you think that it is not useful?
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezc...@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 6 ++----
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 85ff958e01f1..7c72f7d3509c 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1378,8 +1378,7 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
> if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
> cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
>
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> - cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
> + if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
> policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
>
> pr_debug("initialization complete\n");
> @@ -1469,8 +1468,7 @@ static int cpufreq_offline(unsigned int cpu)
> goto unlock;
> }
>
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> - cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV) {
> + if (cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV) {
> cpufreq_cooling_unregister(policy->cdev);
> policy->cdev = NULL;
> }
> --
> 2.17.1
>
