->related_cpus is empty at this point of time and copying ->cpus to it or orring ->related_cpus with ->cpus would result in the same value. But cpumask_copy makes it rather clear.
Reviewed-by: Saravana Kannan skannan@codeaurora.org Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c index 8701dc559850..16b9e811ff01 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -1214,7 +1214,7 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
if (new_policy) { /* related_cpus should at least include policy->cpus. */ - cpumask_or(policy->related_cpus, policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus); + cpumask_copy(policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus); /* Remember CPUs present at the policy creation time. */ cpumask_and(policy->real_cpus, policy->cpus, cpu_present_mask); }