Two local variables in teo_update() are defined as u64, but their
values are then compared with s64 values, so it is more consistent
to use s64 as their data type.
No intentional functional impact.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
Tested-by: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/3026616.e9J7NaK4W3@rafael.j.wysocki
{
struct teo_cpu *cpu_data = this_cpu_ptr(&teo_cpus);
int i, idx_timer = 0, idx_duration = 0;
- s64 target_residency_ns;
- u64 measured_ns;
+ s64 target_residency_ns, measured_ns;
cpu_data->short_idles -= cpu_data->short_idles >> DECAY_SHIFT;
* If one of the safety nets has triggered, assume that this
* might have been a long sleep.
*/
- measured_ns = U64_MAX;
+ measured_ns = S64_MAX;
} else {
- u64 lat_ns = drv->states[dev->last_state_idx].exit_latency_ns;
+ s64 lat_ns = drv->states[dev->last_state_idx].exit_latency_ns;
measured_ns = dev->last_residency_ns;
/*