From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] cpufreq: Drop cpufreq_policy_restore()
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 20:18:54 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150727144854.GD18535@linux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1831805.k1h8RcvUky@vostro.rjw.lan>
On 27-07-15, 16:03, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>
> Notice that when cpufreq_policy_restore() is called, its per-CPU
> cpufreq_cpu_data variable has been already dereferenced and if that
> variable is not NULL, the policy local pointer in cpufreq_add_dev()
> contains its value.
>
> Therefore it is not necessary to dereference it again and the
> policy pointer can be used directly. Moreover, if that pointer
> is not NULL, the policy is inactive (or the previous check would
> have made us return from cpufreq_add_dev()) so the restoration
> code from cpufreq_policy_restore() can be moved to that point
> in cpufreq_add_dev().
>
> Do that and drop cpufreq_policy_restore().
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 44 +++++++++++---------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
--
viresh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-27 14:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-23 0:00 [PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: Better separation of device addition/removal and online/offline paths Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-23 0:01 ` [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: Rename two functions related to CPU offline Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-23 6:40 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-23 0:04 ` [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: Separate CPU device removal from CPU online Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-23 6:39 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-23 20:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-24 2:19 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-24 19:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:01 ` [PATCH 0/7] cpufreq: Better separation of device addition/removal and online/offline paths Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:03 ` [PATCH 1/7] cpufreq: Rework two functions related to CPU offline Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:42 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:03 ` [PATCH 2/7] cpufreq: Drop cpufreq_policy_restore() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:48 ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2015-07-27 14:04 ` [PATCH 3/7] cpufreq: Drop unnecessary label from cpufreq_add_dev() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:52 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:05 ` [PATCH 4/7] cpufreq: Drop unused dev argument from two functions Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:53 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:06 ` [PATCH 5/7] cpufreq: Do not update related_cpus on every policy activation Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:56 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:07 ` [PATCH 6/7] cpufreq: Pass CPU number to cpufreq_policy_alloc() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:58 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:09 ` [PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device removal from CPU online Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 15:06 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 20:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 21:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-28 2:06 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-28 14:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 21:55 ` [Update][PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device registration " Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-28 2:20 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-28 14:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29 1:03 ` [Update 2x][PATCH " Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29 1:08 ` [PATCH] cpufreq: Replace recover_policy with new_policy in cpufreq_online() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29 5:38 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-29 5:32 ` [Update 2x][PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device registration from CPU online Viresh Kumar
2015-07-29 14:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29 14:07 ` 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=20150727144854.GD18535@linux \
--to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
/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 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.