[PATCH] pm: fix u32 vs. pm_message_t confusion in cpufreq
Fix u32 vs pm_message_t confusion in cpufreq.
Signed-off-by: Bernard Blackham <bernard@blackham.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index bf62dfe..7a7859d 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -869,7 +869,7 @@
* cpufreq_suspend - let the low level driver prepare for suspend
*/
-static int cpufreq_suspend(struct sys_device * sysdev, u32 state)
+static int cpufreq_suspend(struct sys_device * sysdev, pm_message_t pmsg)
{
int cpu = sysdev->id;
unsigned int ret = 0;
@@ -897,7 +897,7 @@
}
if (cpufreq_driver->suspend) {
- ret = cpufreq_driver->suspend(cpu_policy, state);
+ ret = cpufreq_driver->suspend(cpu_policy, pmsg);
if (ret) {
printk(KERN_ERR "cpufreq: suspend failed in ->suspend "
"step on CPU %u\n", cpu_policy->cpu);