From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/13] cpuidle: psci: Simplify OF parsing of CPU idle state nodes
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 16:36:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191024153621.GE11467@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191010113937.15962-7-ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 01:39:30PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> Iterating through the idle state nodes in DT, to find out the number of
> states that needs to be allocated is unnecessary, as it has already been
> done from dt_init_idle_driver(). Therefore, drop the iteration and use the
> number we already have at hand.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c
> index 2e91c8d6c211..1195a1056139 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c
> @@ -73,28 +73,22 @@ static int __init psci_dt_parse_state_node(struct device_node *np, u32 *state)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int __init psci_dt_cpu_init_idle(struct device_node *cpu_node, int cpu)
> +static int __init psci_dt_cpu_init_idle(struct device_node *cpu_node,
> + unsigned int state_nodes, int cpu)
[super nit] Too much in the beginning of the patch to not notice this ;)
May need some '(' alignment here and other places in general.
> {
> - int i, ret = 0, count = 0;
> + int i, ret = 0;
> u32 *psci_states;
> struct device_node *state_node;
>
> - /* Count idle states */
> - while ((state_node = of_parse_phandle(cpu_node, "cpu-idle-states",
> - count))) {
> - count++;
> - of_node_put(state_node);
> - }
> -
> - if (!count)
> - return -ENODEV;
> -
> - psci_states = kcalloc(count, sizeof(*psci_states), GFP_KERNEL);
> + psci_states = kcalloc(state_nodes, sizeof(*psci_states), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!psci_states)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
> + for (i = 0; i < state_nodes; i++) {
> state_node = of_parse_phandle(cpu_node, "cpu-idle-states", i);
Can we move above to use of_get_cpu_state_node ? Since it also handles
domain-idle-states.
> + if (!state_node)
> + break;
> +
> ret = psci_dt_parse_state_node(state_node, &psci_states[i]);
> of_node_put(state_node);
>
> @@ -104,6 +98,11 @@ static int __init psci_dt_cpu_init_idle(struct device_node *cpu_node, int cpu)
> pr_debug("psci-power-state %#x index %d\n", psci_states[i], i);
> }
>
> + if (i != state_nodes) {
> + ret = -ENODEV;
> + goto free_mem;
> + }
> +
> /* Idle states parsed correctly, initialize per-cpu pointer */
> per_cpu(psci_power_state, cpu) = psci_states;
> return 0;
> @@ -113,7 +112,7 @@ static int __init psci_dt_cpu_init_idle(struct device_node *cpu_node, int cpu)
> return ret;
> }
>
> -static __init int psci_cpu_init_idle(unsigned int cpu)
> +static __init int psci_cpu_init_idle(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int state_nodes)
Does it make sense to rename it as state_count or something similar ?
And it may need + 1 once we add wfi also as entry as suggested by
Lorenzo.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-24 15:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-10 11:39 [PATCH 00/13] cpuidle: psci: Support hierarchical CPU arrangement Ulf Hansson
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 01/13] cpuidle: psci: Fix potential access to unmapped memory Ulf Hansson
2019-10-18 9:38 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-18 9:51 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-18 10:03 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-18 10:29 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-18 16:47 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-24 15:18 ` [PATCH] cpuidle: psci: Align psci_power_state count with idle state count Sudeep Holla
2019-10-24 16:10 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-27 2:20 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 02/13] dt: psci: Update DT bindings to support hierarchical PSCI states Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 15:26 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-24 16:23 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 03/13] firmware: psci: Export functions to manage the OSI mode Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 15:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 04/13] of: base: Add of_get_cpu_state_node() to get idle states for a CPU node Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 15:28 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 05/13] cpuidle: dt: Support hierarchical CPU idle states Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 15:30 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 06/13] cpuidle: psci: Simplify OF parsing of CPU idle state nodes Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 15:36 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2019-10-24 16:33 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-27 2:24 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 07/13] cpuidle: psci: Support hierarchical CPU idle states Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 15:39 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 08/13] cpuidle: psci: Prepare to use OS initiated suspend mode via PM domains Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 15:42 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-24 17:01 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 09/13] cpuidle: psci: Add support for PM domains by using genpd Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 15:46 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 10/13] cpuidle: psci: Add a helper to attach a CPU to its PM domain Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 16:31 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-24 16:47 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-27 2:30 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-28 7:35 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-28 7:49 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-28 9:45 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-29 5:34 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-29 9:44 ` Niklas Cassel
2019-10-30 0:50 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 11/13] cpuidle: psci: Attach CPU devices to their PM domains Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 16:35 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-24 16:55 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-27 2:32 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 12/13] cpuidle: psci: Manage runtime PM in the idle path Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 16:32 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-24 17:00 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-25 8:28 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-25 14:13 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-27 2:34 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-28 22:40 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-10 11:39 ` [PATCH 13/13] arm64: dts: Convert to the hierarchical CPU topology layout for MSM8916 Ulf Hansson
2019-10-24 16:41 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-24 17:03 ` Ulf Hansson
2019-10-18 8:10 ` [PATCH 00/13] cpuidle: psci: Support hierarchical CPU arrangement Ulf Hansson
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=20191024153621.GE11467@bogus \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=ilina@codeaurora.org \
--cc=khilman@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@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: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).