From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2F27C54E8E for ; Tue, 12 May 2020 11:11:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BF1B20722 for ; Tue, 12 May 2020 11:11:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729450AbgELLLU (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2020 07:11:20 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:52600 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726891AbgELLLT (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2020 07:11:19 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9E0930E; Tue, 12 May 2020 04:11:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.37.12.83] (unknown [10.37.12.83]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB2703F71E; Tue, 12 May 2020 04:11:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 03/15] PM / EM: update callback structure and add device pointer To: Quentin Perret Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-imx@nxp.com, Dietmar.Eggemann@arm.com, cw00.choi@samsung.com, b.zolnierkie@samsung.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, sudeep.holla@arm.com, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, nm@ti.com, sboyd@kernel.org, rui.zhang@intel.com, amit.kucheria@verdurent.com, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, shawnguo@kernel.org, s.hauer@pengutronix.de, festevam@gmail.com, kernel@pengutronix.de, khilman@kernel.org, agross@kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, robh@kernel.org, matthias.bgg@gmail.com, steven.price@arm.com, tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com, alyssa.rosenzweig@collabora.com, airlied@linux.ie, daniel@ffwll.ch, liviu.dudau@arm.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, patrick.bellasi@matbug.net, orjan.eide@arm.com, rdunlap@infradead.org, mka@chromium.org References: <20200511111912.3001-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com> <20200511111912.3001-4-lukasz.luba@arm.com> <20200511115722.GA13741@google.com> From: Lukasz Luba Message-ID: Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 12:11:06 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200511115722.GA13741@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Hi Quentin, On 5/11/20 12:57 PM, Quentin Perret wrote: > On Monday 11 May 2020 at 12:19:00 (+0100), Lukasz Luba wrote: >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c >> index 61623e2ff149..11ee24e06d12 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c >> @@ -103,17 +103,12 @@ scmi_get_sharing_cpus(struct device *cpu_dev, struct cpumask *cpumask) >> } >> >> static int __maybe_unused >> -scmi_get_cpu_power(unsigned long *power, unsigned long *KHz, int cpu) >> +scmi_get_cpu_power(unsigned long *power, unsigned long *KHz, >> + struct device *cpu_dev) >> { >> - struct device *cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu); >> unsigned long Hz; >> int ret, domain; >> >> - if (!cpu_dev) { >> - pr_err("failed to get cpu%d device\n", cpu); >> - return -ENODEV; >> - } >> - >> domain = handle->perf_ops->device_domain_id(cpu_dev); >> if (domain < 0) >> return domain; >> @@ -200,7 +195,7 @@ static int scmi_cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) >> >> policy->fast_switch_possible = true; >> >> - em_register_perf_domain(policy->cpus, nr_opp, &em_cb); > > So this one has no users after this patch right? I suppose you could > squash patch 05 in this one. But no big deal. Yes, it was tricky to me to decide the splits suggested by Daniel and this is the example. I had to introduce the em_dev_register_perf_domain and make clients of it before I remove the old em_register_perf_domain completely. I agree it could also go with the patch 5, but it does not harm to be here. > > Acked-by: Quentin Perret Thank you for this ACKs and the earlier. Regards, Lukasz > >> + em_dev_register_perf_domain(cpu_dev, nr_opp, &em_cb, policy->cpus); >> >> return 0;