From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> To: rjw@sisk.pl Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> Subject: [PATCH 06/34] cpufreq: cpu0: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition() Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 07:55:03 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <c3ce6b7d589113f149f8e1aaac82a6e6ce857a70.1376619363.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <cover.1376619363.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <cover.1376619363.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Most of the drivers do following in their ->target_index() routines: struct cpufreq_freqs freqs; freqs.old = old freq... freqs.new = new freq... cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE); /* Change rate here */ cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE); This is replicated over all cpufreq drivers today and there doesn't exists a good enough reason why this shouldn't be moved to cpufreq core instead. Earlier patches have added support in cpufreq core to do cpufreq notification on frequency change, this one removes it from this driver. Some related minor cleanups are also done along with it. Cc: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c | 33 ++++++++++++--------------------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c index 4014925..ddd9010 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c @@ -36,20 +36,19 @@ static unsigned int cpu0_get_speed(unsigned int cpu) static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index) { - struct cpufreq_freqs freqs; struct opp *opp; unsigned long volt = 0, volt_old = 0, tol = 0; + unsigned int old_freq, new_freq; long freq_Hz, freq_exact; int ret; freq_Hz = clk_round_rate(cpu_clk, freq_table[index].frequency * 1000); if (freq_Hz < 0) freq_Hz = freq_table[index].frequency * 1000; - freq_exact = freq_Hz; - freqs.new = freq_Hz / 1000; - freqs.old = clk_get_rate(cpu_clk) / 1000; - cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE); + freq_exact = freq_Hz; + new_freq = freq_Hz / 1000; + old_freq = clk_get_rate(cpu_clk) / 1000; if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg)) { rcu_read_lock(); @@ -57,9 +56,7 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index) if (IS_ERR(opp)) { rcu_read_unlock(); pr_err("failed to find OPP for %ld\n", freq_Hz); - freqs.new = freqs.old; - ret = PTR_ERR(opp); - goto post_notify; + return PTR_ERR(opp); } volt = opp_get_voltage(opp); rcu_read_unlock(); @@ -68,16 +65,15 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index) } pr_debug("%u MHz, %ld mV --> %u MHz, %ld mV\n", - freqs.old / 1000, volt_old ? volt_old / 1000 : -1, - freqs.new / 1000, volt ? volt / 1000 : -1); + old_freq / 1000, volt_old ? volt_old / 1000 : -1, + new_freq / 1000, volt ? volt / 1000 : -1); /* scaling up? scale voltage before frequency */ - if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg) && freqs.new > freqs.old) { + if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg) && new_freq > old_freq) { ret = regulator_set_voltage_tol(cpu_reg, volt, tol); if (ret) { pr_err("failed to scale voltage up: %d\n", ret); - freqs.new = freqs.old; - goto post_notify; + return ret; } } @@ -86,23 +82,18 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index) pr_err("failed to set clock rate: %d\n", ret); if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg)) regulator_set_voltage_tol(cpu_reg, volt_old, tol); - freqs.new = freqs.old; - goto post_notify; + return ret; } /* scaling down? scale voltage after frequency */ - if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg) && freqs.new < freqs.old) { + if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg) && new_freq < old_freq) { ret = regulator_set_voltage_tol(cpu_reg, volt, tol); if (ret) { pr_err("failed to scale voltage down: %d\n", ret); - clk_set_rate(cpu_clk, freqs.old * 1000); - freqs.new = freqs.old; + clk_set_rate(cpu_clk, old_freq * 1000); } } -post_notify: - cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE); - return ret; } -- 1.7.12.rc2.18.g61b472e
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: viresh.kumar@linaro.org (Viresh Kumar) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH 06/34] cpufreq: cpu0: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition() Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 07:55:03 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <c3ce6b7d589113f149f8e1aaac82a6e6ce857a70.1376619363.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <cover.1376619363.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Most of the drivers do following in their ->target_index() routines: struct cpufreq_freqs freqs; freqs.old = old freq... freqs.new = new freq... cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE); /* Change rate here */ cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE); This is replicated over all cpufreq drivers today and there doesn't exists a good enough reason why this shouldn't be moved to cpufreq core instead. Earlier patches have added support in cpufreq core to do cpufreq notification on frequency change, this one removes it from this driver. Some related minor cleanups are also done along with it. Cc: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c | 33 ++++++++++++--------------------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c index 4014925..ddd9010 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c @@ -36,20 +36,19 @@ static unsigned int cpu0_get_speed(unsigned int cpu) static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index) { - struct cpufreq_freqs freqs; struct opp *opp; unsigned long volt = 0, volt_old = 0, tol = 0; + unsigned int old_freq, new_freq; long freq_Hz, freq_exact; int ret; freq_Hz = clk_round_rate(cpu_clk, freq_table[index].frequency * 1000); if (freq_Hz < 0) freq_Hz = freq_table[index].frequency * 1000; - freq_exact = freq_Hz; - freqs.new = freq_Hz / 1000; - freqs.old = clk_get_rate(cpu_clk) / 1000; - cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE); + freq_exact = freq_Hz; + new_freq = freq_Hz / 1000; + old_freq = clk_get_rate(cpu_clk) / 1000; if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg)) { rcu_read_lock(); @@ -57,9 +56,7 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index) if (IS_ERR(opp)) { rcu_read_unlock(); pr_err("failed to find OPP for %ld\n", freq_Hz); - freqs.new = freqs.old; - ret = PTR_ERR(opp); - goto post_notify; + return PTR_ERR(opp); } volt = opp_get_voltage(opp); rcu_read_unlock(); @@ -68,16 +65,15 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index) } pr_debug("%u MHz, %ld mV --> %u MHz, %ld mV\n", - freqs.old / 1000, volt_old ? volt_old / 1000 : -1, - freqs.new / 1000, volt ? volt / 1000 : -1); + old_freq / 1000, volt_old ? volt_old / 1000 : -1, + new_freq / 1000, volt ? volt / 1000 : -1); /* scaling up? scale voltage before frequency */ - if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg) && freqs.new > freqs.old) { + if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg) && new_freq > old_freq) { ret = regulator_set_voltage_tol(cpu_reg, volt, tol); if (ret) { pr_err("failed to scale voltage up: %d\n", ret); - freqs.new = freqs.old; - goto post_notify; + return ret; } } @@ -86,23 +82,18 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index) pr_err("failed to set clock rate: %d\n", ret); if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg)) regulator_set_voltage_tol(cpu_reg, volt_old, tol); - freqs.new = freqs.old; - goto post_notify; + return ret; } /* scaling down? scale voltage after frequency */ - if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg) && freqs.new < freqs.old) { + if (!IS_ERR(cpu_reg) && new_freq < old_freq) { ret = regulator_set_voltage_tol(cpu_reg, volt, tol); if (ret) { pr_err("failed to scale voltage down: %d\n", ret); - clk_set_rate(cpu_clk, freqs.old * 1000); - freqs.new = freqs.old; + clk_set_rate(cpu_clk, old_freq * 1000); } } -post_notify: - cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE); - return ret; } -- 1.7.12.rc2.18.g61b472e
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-16 2:26 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 97+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2013-08-16 2:24 [PATCH 00/34] CPUFreq: Move freq change notifications out of drivers Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:36 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:24 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:24 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:24 ` [PATCH 01/34] cpufreq: move freq change notifications to cpufreq core Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:36 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:24 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:24 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:24 ` [PATCH 02/34] cpufreq: acpi: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition() Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:24 ` Viresh Kumar [not found] ` <CAOLK0pz7e8nQVnZY0a-j_Fd_kFOqF8ZS4tRfYw1S+25Lv8GoFQ@mail.gmail.com> [not found] ` <CAOLK0pyVDSc6x1u8Ro6ng1dH8ELqc3P9jPHamgiXBn6sWDgm8w@mail.gmail.com> 2013-08-16 7:59 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 7:59 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 7:59 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 15:30 ` Lan Tianyu 2013-08-16 15:30 ` Lan Tianyu 2013-08-16 15:30 ` Lan Tianyu 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 03/34] cpufreq: arm_big_little: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 04/34] cpufreq: at32ap: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 5:58 ` Hans-Christian Egtvedt 2013-08-16 5:58 ` Hans-Christian Egtvedt 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 05/34] cpufreq: blackfin: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar [this message] 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 06/34] cpufreq: cpu0: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 07/34] cpufreq: cris: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2017-10-10 7:57 ` Jesper Nilsson 2017-10-10 7:57 ` Jesper Nilsson 2017-10-10 7:57 ` Jesper Nilsson 2017-10-10 9:13 ` Viresh Kumar 2017-10-10 9:13 ` Viresh Kumar 2017-10-10 9:13 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 08/34] cpufreq: davinci: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 09/34] cpufreq: dbx500: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 10/34] cpufreq: e_powersaver: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 11/34] cpufreq: elanfreq: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 12/34] cpufreq: exynos: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 13/34] cpufreq: exynos5440: set CPUFREQ_NO_NOTIFICATION flag Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-18 10:54 ` amit daniel kachhap 2013-08-18 10:54 ` amit daniel kachhap 2013-08-18 21:57 ` Kukjin Kim 2013-08-18 21:57 ` Kukjin Kim 2013-08-19 3:42 ` amit daniel kachhap 2013-08-19 3:42 ` amit daniel kachhap 2013-08-19 4:40 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-19 4:40 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 14/34] cpufreq: ia64-acpi: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition() Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 15/34] cpufreq: imx6q: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 16/34] cpufreq: kirkwood: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 17/34] cpufreq: longhaul: set CPUFREQ_NO_NOTIFICATION flag Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 18/34] cpufreq: loongson2: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition() Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 19/34] cpufreq: maple: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 20/34] cpufreq: omap: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 21/34] cpufreq: p4-clockmod: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 22/34] cpufreq: pasemi: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 23/34] cpufreq: pmac: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 24/34] cpufreq: powernow: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 25/34] cpufreq: ppc: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 26/34] cpufreq: pxa: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 27/34] cpufreq: s3c: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 28/34] cpufreq: s5pv210: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 29/34] cpufreq: sa11x0: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 30/34] cpufreq: sc520: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 31/34] cpufreq: sparc: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:37 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 32/34] cpufreq: SPEAr: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 33/34] cpufreq: speedstep: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` [PATCH 34/34] cpufreq: tegra: " Viresh Kumar 2013-08-16 2:25 ` 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=c3ce6b7d589113f149f8e1aaac82a6e6ce857a70.1376619363.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org \ --to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \ --cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=patches@linaro.org \ --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \ --cc=shawn.guo@linaro.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: linkBe 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.