Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: DAVINCI: cpuidle - remove ops

[Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>]

On 05/20/2012 12:19 PM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On 5/10/2012 2:14 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> This patch removes the ops usage because we have the index
>> passed as parameter to the idle function and we can determine
>> if we do WFI or memory retention.
>>
>> The benefit of this cleanup is the removal of:
>>   * the ops
>>   * the statedata usage because we want to get rid of it in all the drivers
>>   * extra structure definition
>>   * extra functions definition
>>   * pointless macro definition BIT(0)
>
> This macro was not pointless in the original code. This comment seems to
> suggest so.
>
>>
>> It also benefits the readability.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano<daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c |   81 +++++++++++++--------------------------
>>   1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c
>> index f0f179c..61f4e52 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c
>> @@ -25,35 +25,46 @@
>>
>>   #define DAVINCI_CPUIDLE_MAX_STATES	2
>>
>> -struct davinci_ops {
>> -	void (*enter) (u32 flags);
>> -	void (*exit) (u32 flags);
>> -	u32 flags;
>> -};
>> +static bool ddr2_pwdn = false;
>
> This zero initialization is not required. In fact this throws a
> checkpatch error.
>
>> +
>> +static void __iomem *ddr2_reg_base;
>> +
>> +static void davinci_save_ddr_power(int enter, bool pdown)
>> +{
>> +	u32 val;
>> +
>> +	val = __raw_readl(ddr2_reg_base + DDR2_SDRCR_OFFSET);
>> +
>> +	if (enter) {
>> +		if (pdown)
>> +			val |= DDR2_SRPD_BIT;
>> +		else
>> +			val&= ~DDR2_SRPD_BIT;
>> +		val |= DDR2_LPMODEN_BIT;
>> +	} else {
>> +		val&= ~(DDR2_SRPD_BIT | DDR2_LPMODEN_BIT);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	__raw_writel(val, ddr2_reg_base + DDR2_SDRCR_OFFSET);
>
> Can you please use readl/writel instead of the __raw variants. I know
> this is carried from original code, but we need to git rid of it with
> cleanups like this.

Sure, I will resend a version without the initialization and the 
_raw_write variant.

Thanks
   -- Daniel


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm