From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Lezcano Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/9] cpufreq: Auto-register the driver as a thermal cooling device if asked Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 09:32:44 +0100 Message-ID: <3afd5b04-5caf-053d-48c9-f719eec58da0@linaro.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Amit Kucheria , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, edubezval@gmail.com, swboyd@chromium.org, dianders@chromium.org, mka@chromium.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , Tao Wang , Sudeep Holla , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On 28/01/2019 07:41, Amit Kucheria wrote: > All cpufreq drivers do similar things to register as a cooling device. > Provide a cpufreq driver flag so drivers can just ask the cpufreq core > to register the cooling device on their behalf. This allows us to get > rid of duplicated code in the drivers. > > In order to allow this, we add a struct thermal_cooling_device pointer > to struct cpufreq_policy so that drivers don't need to store it in a > private data structure. > > Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd > Suggested-by: Viresh Kumar > Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria > Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke > Tested-by: Matthias Kaehlcke > --- [ ... ] > +/* > + * Set by drivers that want the core to automatically register the cpufreq > + * driver as a thermal cooling device. > + */ > +#define CPUFREQ_AUTO_REGISTER_COOLING_DEV BIT(7) > + Isn't the CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV more appropriate? We define a property of the cpufreq driver and the resulting action is to auto-register, no? -- Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog