From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755909AbcECKqH (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 May 2016 06:46:07 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:37863 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755462AbcECKqE (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 May 2016 06:46:04 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] PM / OPP: add non-OF versions of dev_pm_opp_{cpumask_,}remove_table To: Stephen Boyd , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1461926262-24732-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <5727DAFA.5040902@codeaurora.org> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Sudeep Holla , Viresh Kumar , Viresh Kumar , Nishanth Menon , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org From: Sudeep Holla Organization: ARM Message-ID: <57288168.7060105@arm.com> Date: Tue, 3 May 2016 11:46:00 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5727DAFA.5040902@codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/05/16 23:55, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 04/29/2016 03:37 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> Functions dev_pm_opp_of_{cpumask_,}remove_table removes/frees all the >> static OPP entries associated with the device and/or all cpus(in case >> of cpumask) that are created from DT. >> >> However the OPP entries are populated reading from the firmware or some >> different method using dev_pm_opp_add are marked dynamic and can't be >> removed using above functions. >> >> This patch adds non DT/OF versions of dev_pm_opp_{cpumask_,}remove_table >> to support the above mentioned usecase. >> >> This is in preparation to make use of the same in scpi-cpufreq.c >> >> Cc: Viresh Kumar >> Cc: Nishanth Menon >> CC: Stephen Boyd >> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" >> Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org >> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar >> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla > > Could you rebase this on top of Arnd's patch[1] to fix the cpumask_var_t > usage? Your patch introduces more incorrect use of that type. > Thanks for noticing that. I will rebase on top of that patch and repost it. -- Regards, Sudeep