All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Viresh Kumar <vireshk@kernel.org>,
	Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] PM / OPP: add non-OF versions of dev_pm_opp_{cpumask_,}remove_table
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 09:37:21 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160429040721.GV2915@vireshk-i7> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1461863237-12928-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com>

On 28-04-16, 18:07, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/opp/core.c b/drivers/base/power/opp/core.c
> index 433b60092972..e59b9e7c31ba 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/power/opp/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/opp/core.c
> @@ -1845,13 +1845,14 @@ struct srcu_notifier_head *dev_pm_opp_get_notifier(struct device *dev)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_opp_get_notifier);
>  
> -#ifdef CONFIG_OF
>  /**
> - * dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table() - Free OPP table entries created from static DT
> - *				  entries
> + * _dev_pm_opp_remove_table() - Free OPP table entries

This is an internal routine and doesn't really require a doc-style comment at
all. Please remove it. You can add a simple comment for things you want to
mention though.

>   * @dev:	device pointer used to lookup OPP table.
> + * @remove_dyn:	specify whether to remove only OPPs created using
> + *              static entries from DT or even the dynamically add OPPs.
>   *
> - * Free OPPs created using static entries present in DT.
> + * Free OPPs either created using static entries present in DT or even the
> + * dynamically added entries based on @remove_dyn param.
>   *
>   * Locking: The internal opp_table and opp structures are RCU protected.
>   * Hence this function indirectly uses RCU updater strategy with mutex locks
> @@ -1859,7 +1860,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_opp_get_notifier);
>   * that this function is *NOT* called under RCU protection or in contexts where
>   * mutex cannot be locked.
>   */
> -void dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(struct device *dev)
> +static void _dev_pm_opp_remove_table(struct device *dev, bool remove_dyn)

Maybe s/remove_dyn/remove_all ..

>  {
>  	struct opp_table *opp_table;
>  	struct dev_pm_opp *opp, *tmp;
> @@ -1884,7 +1885,7 @@ void dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(struct device *dev)
>  	if (list_is_singular(&opp_table->dev_list)) {
>  		/* Free static OPPs */
>  		list_for_each_entry_safe(opp, tmp, &opp_table->opp_list, node) {
> -			if (!opp->dynamic)
> +			if (!opp->dynamic || (opp->dynamic && remove_dyn))

Well, that's a funny one :)

The second conditional statement doesn't require opp->dynamic, as that is
guaranteed to be true, as the first condition failed.

So this should be:

if (remove_all || !opp->dynamic)

>  				_opp_remove(opp_table, opp, true);
>  		}
>  	} else {
> @@ -1894,6 +1895,44 @@ void dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(struct device *dev)
>  unlock:
>  	mutex_unlock(&opp_table_lock);
>  }
> +
> +/**
> + * dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table() - Free OPP table entries created from static DT

No, this isn't the OF specific function.

> + *				  entries
> + * @dev:	device pointer used to lookup OPP table.
> + *
> + * Free all OPPs associated with the device

Full stop at the end.

> + *
> + * Locking: The internal opp_table and opp structures are RCU protected.
> + * Hence this function indirectly uses RCU updater strategy with mutex locks
> + * to keep the integrity of the internal data structures. Callers should ensure
> + * that this function is *NOT* called under RCU protection or in contexts where
> + * mutex cannot be locked.
> + */
> +void dev_pm_opp_remove_table(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	_dev_pm_opp_remove_table(dev, true);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_opp_remove_table);
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
> +/**
> + * dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table() - Free OPP table entries created from static DT
> + *				  entries
> + * @dev:	device pointer used to lookup OPP table.
> + *
> + * Free OPPs created using static entries present in DT.
> + *
> + * Locking: The internal opp_table and opp structures are RCU protected.
> + * Hence this function indirectly uses RCU updater strategy with mutex locks
> + * to keep the integrity of the internal data structures. Callers should ensure
> + * that this function is *NOT* called under RCU protection or in contexts where
> + * mutex cannot be locked.
> + */
> +void dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	_dev_pm_opp_remove_table(dev, false);
> +}
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table);
>  
>  /* Returns opp descriptor node for a device, caller must do of_node_put() */
> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/opp/cpu.c b/drivers/base/power/opp/cpu.c
> index 55cbf9bd8707..9df4ad809c26 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/power/opp/cpu.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/opp/cpu.c
> @@ -119,12 +119,54 @@ void dev_pm_opp_free_cpufreq_table(struct device *dev,
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_opp_free_cpufreq_table);
>  #endif	/* CONFIG_CPU_FREQ */
>  
> +static void _dev_pm_opp_cpumask_remove_table(cpumask_var_t cpumask, bool of)
> +{
> +	struct device *cpu_dev;
> +	int cpu;
> +
> +	WARN_ON(cpumask_empty(cpumask));
> +
> +	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpumask) {
> +		cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> +		if (!cpu_dev) {
> +			pr_err("%s: failed to get cpu%d device\n", __func__,
> +			       cpu);
> +			continue;
> +		}

Blank line here.

> +		if (of)
> +			dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(cpu_dev);
> +		else
> +			dev_pm_opp_remove_table(cpu_dev);
> +	}
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_remove_table() - Removes OPP table for @cpumask

of :(

> + * @cpumask:	cpumask for which OPP table needs to be removed
> + *
> + * This removes the OPP tables for CPUs present in the @cpumask.
> + * This should be used to remove all the OPPs entries associated with
> + * the cpus in @cpumask.
> + *
> + * Locking: The internal opp_table and opp structures are RCU protected.
> + * Hence this function internally uses RCU updater strategy with mutex locks
> + * to keep the integrity of the internal data structures. Callers should ensure
> + * that this function is *NOT* called under RCU protection or in contexts where
> + * mutex cannot be locked.
> + */
> +void dev_pm_opp_cpumask_remove_table(cpumask_var_t cpumask)
> +{
> +	_dev_pm_opp_cpumask_remove_table(cpumask, false);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_opp_cpumask_remove_table);
> +
>  #ifdef CONFIG_OF
>  /**
>   * dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_remove_table() - Removes OPP table for @cpumask
>   * @cpumask:	cpumask for which OPP table needs to be removed
>   *
>   * This removes the OPP tables for CPUs present in the @cpumask.
> + * This should be used only to remove static entries created from DT.
>   *
>   * Locking: The internal opp_table and opp structures are RCU protected.
>   * Hence this function internally uses RCU updater strategy with mutex locks
> @@ -134,21 +176,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_opp_free_cpufreq_table);
>   */
>  void dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_remove_table(cpumask_var_t cpumask)
>  {
> -	struct device *cpu_dev;
> -	int cpu;
> -
> -	WARN_ON(cpumask_empty(cpumask));
> -
> -	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpumask) {
> -		cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> -		if (!cpu_dev) {
> -			pr_err("%s: failed to get cpu%d device\n", __func__,
> -			       cpu);
> -			continue;
> -		}
> -
> -		dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(cpu_dev);
> -	}
> +	_dev_pm_opp_cpumask_remove_table(cpumask, true);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_remove_table);
>  
> diff --git a/include/linux/pm_opp.h b/include/linux/pm_opp.h
> index 5b6ad31403a5..5c3781a79d31 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pm_opp.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pm_opp.h
> @@ -66,6 +66,8 @@ int dev_pm_opp_set_regulator(struct device *dev, const char *name);
>  void dev_pm_opp_put_regulator(struct device *dev);
>  int dev_pm_opp_set_rate(struct device *dev, unsigned long target_freq);
>  int dev_pm_opp_set_sharing_cpus(struct device *cpu_dev, cpumask_var_t cpumask);
> +void dev_pm_opp_remove_table(struct device *dev);
> +void dev_pm_opp_cpumask_remove_table(cpumask_var_t cpumask);
>  #else
>  static inline unsigned long dev_pm_opp_get_voltage(struct dev_pm_opp *opp)
>  {
> @@ -184,6 +186,14 @@ static inline int dev_pm_opp_set_sharing_cpus(struct device *cpu_dev, cpumask_va
>  	return -ENOSYS;
>  }
>  
> +static inline void dev_pm_opp_remove_table(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +}
> +
> +static inline void dev_pm_opp_cpumask_remove_table(cpumask_var_t cpumask)
> +{
> +}
> +
>  #endif		/* CONFIG_PM_OPP */
>  
>  #if defined(CONFIG_PM_OPP) && defined(CONFIG_OF)
> -- 
> 1.9.1

-- 
viresh

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-04-29  4:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-28 10:25 [PATCH 1/2] PM / OPP: Remove OF dependency on dev_pm_opp_of_{cpumask_,}remove_table Sudeep Holla
2016-04-28 10:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: arm_big_little: use generic OPP functions for {init,free}_opp_table Sudeep Holla
2016-04-28 11:26   ` Viresh Kumar
2016-04-28 12:48     ` Sudeep Holla
2016-04-28 11:12 ` [PATCH 1/2] PM / OPP: Remove OF dependency on dev_pm_opp_of_{cpumask_,}remove_table Viresh Kumar
2016-04-28 11:15   ` Viresh Kumar
2016-04-28 11:22   ` Sudeep Holla
2016-04-28 17:07 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] PM / OPP: add non-OF versions of dev_pm_opp_{cpumask_,}remove_table Sudeep Holla
2016-04-28 17:07   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] cpufreq: arm_big_little: use generic OPP functions for {init,free}_opp_table Sudeep Holla
2016-04-29  4:12     ` Viresh Kumar
2016-04-29  4:07   ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2016-04-29  9:22     ` [PATCH v2 1/2] PM / OPP: add non-OF versions of dev_pm_opp_{cpumask_,}remove_table Sudeep Holla
2016-04-29  9:22   ` [PATCH v2 1/2][UPDATE] " Sudeep Holla
2016-04-29  9:28     ` Viresh Kumar
2016-04-29  9:31       ` Sudeep Holla
2016-04-29  9:32         ` Viresh Kumar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160429040721.GV2915@vireshk-i7 \
    --to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nm@ti.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=vireshk@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.