[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>

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index bf62dfe4976a..7a7859dd0d98 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -869,7 +869,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpufreq_get);
  *      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 @@ static int cpufreq_suspend(struct sys_device * sysdev, u32 state)
         }
 
         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);