>>> On 23.10.15 at 10:18, <wei.w.w...@intel.com> wrote:
> On 07/10/2015 23:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 14.09.15 at 04:32, <wei.w.w...@intel.com> wrote:
>> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/acpi/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/acpi/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> > @@ -647,9 +648,11 @@ static int __init cpufreq_driver_init(void)
>> > int ret = 0;
>> >
>> > if ((cpufreq_controller == FREQCTL_xen) &&
>> > - (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_INTEL))
>> > - ret = cpufreq_register_driver(&acpi_cpufreq_driver);
>> > - else if ((cpufreq_controller == FREQCTL_xen) &&
>> > + (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_INTEL)) {
>> > + ret = intel_pstate_init();
>> > + if (ret)
>> > + ret = cpufreq_register_driver(&acpi_cpufreq_driver);
>> > + } else if ((cpufreq_controller == FREQCTL_xen) &&
>> > (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD))
>> > ret = powernow_register_driver();
>>
>> Since you're basically modifying the entire body of the function, please
> gets its
>> coding style corrected as you fiddle with it.
>
> Ok, I guess you was probably referring to the remaining lines in the
> function - "(boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD))".. Will align them
> as well.
No, I'm not just talking about alignment. And the coding style of the
file is mixed already (see e.g. the following function, which admittedly
has even more blanks than needed), so getting this function into
proper shape since you modify it in its entirety is a step in the right
direction.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
