From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@linaro.org>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
khilman@linaro.org, galak@codeaurora.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com,
msivasub@codeaurora.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v15 04/11] ARM: cpuidle: Register cpuidle_ops for QCOM cpus
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 10:57:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5502B47E.4010106@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150312150655.GA497@linaro.org>
On 03/12/2015 04:06 PM, Lina Iyer wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12 2015 at 06:34 -0600, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 03/11/2015 07:16 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> On 03/09/15 08:16, Lina Iyer wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_QCOM_PM)
>>>
>>> Why not #ifdef CONFIG_QCOM_PM? I thought IS_ENABLED was for C code where
>>> you want to put it in an if () statement.
>>
>> This is right. But the IS_ENABLED is also valid.
>>
>> It seems the current trend is to replace #ifdef with #if IS_ENABLED.
>> It is supposed to prevent to create or'ed conditional with the module
>> support.
>>
>> eg:
>>
>> #if defined(CONFIG_FOO) || defined(CONFIG_FOO_MODULE)
>>
>> is replaced by:
>>
>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FOO)
>>
>> Lina: By the way, it would be preferable to use the
>> CONFIG_ARM_QCOM_CPUIDLE where IS_ENABLED makes more sense even the
>
> Daniel: I dont have CONFIG_ARM_QCOM_CPUIDLE defined anymore. By moving
> to generic ARM cpuidle, i removed all changes to drivers/cpuidle/. So I
> used the config item that defineds these items.
>
> Also, having two indpendent CONFIG_ items provides a chance that the
> declaration is not matched with the definition or vice versa.
I think CONFIG_ARM_QCOM_CPUIDLE should be defined as a bool in the
Kconfig.arm in drivers/cpuidle.
We may want to disable the different cpuidle drivers even if they rely
on the generic cpuidle driver.
>> drivers are not modules (who knows if they are converted as module
>> again hence #ifdef will be invalid).
>>
>>
>>
>>>> +CPUIDLE_OPS(qcom_kpss_v1)
>>>> +CPUIDLE_OPS(qcom_kpss_v2)
>>>> +#endif
>
--
<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
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH v15 04/11] ARM: cpuidle: Register cpuidle_ops for QCOM cpus
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 10:57:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5502B47E.4010106@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150312150655.GA497@linaro.org>
On 03/12/2015 04:06 PM, Lina Iyer wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12 2015 at 06:34 -0600, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 03/11/2015 07:16 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> On 03/09/15 08:16, Lina Iyer wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_QCOM_PM)
>>>
>>> Why not #ifdef CONFIG_QCOM_PM? I thought IS_ENABLED was for C code where
>>> you want to put it in an if () statement.
>>
>> This is right. But the IS_ENABLED is also valid.
>>
>> It seems the current trend is to replace #ifdef with #if IS_ENABLED.
>> It is supposed to prevent to create or'ed conditional with the module
>> support.
>>
>> eg:
>>
>> #if defined(CONFIG_FOO) || defined(CONFIG_FOO_MODULE)
>>
>> is replaced by:
>>
>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FOO)
>>
>> Lina: By the way, it would be preferable to use the
>> CONFIG_ARM_QCOM_CPUIDLE where IS_ENABLED makes more sense even the
>
> Daniel: I dont have CONFIG_ARM_QCOM_CPUIDLE defined anymore. By moving
> to generic ARM cpuidle, i removed all changes to drivers/cpuidle/. So I
> used the config item that defineds these items.
>
> Also, having two indpendent CONFIG_ items provides a chance that the
> declaration is not matched with the definition or vice versa.
I think CONFIG_ARM_QCOM_CPUIDLE should be defined as a bool in the
Kconfig.arm in drivers/cpuidle.
We may want to disable the different cpuidle drivers even if they rely
on the generic cpuidle driver.
>> drivers are not modules (who knows if they are converted as module
>> again hence #ifdef will be invalid).
>>
>>
>>
>>>> +CPUIDLE_OPS(qcom_kpss_v1)
>>>> +CPUIDLE_OPS(qcom_kpss_v2)
>>>> +#endif
>
--
<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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-13 9:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-09 15:16 [RFC PATCH v15 00/11] ARM: qcom: cpuidle support for 8064, 8074, 8084 Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` [RFC PATCH v15 01/11] ARM: cpuidle: Register per cpuidle device Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 21:29 ` Andy Gross
2015-03-09 21:29 ` Andy Gross
2015-03-09 21:40 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 21:40 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 22:04 ` Andy Gross
2015-03-09 22:04 ` Andy Gross
2015-03-10 10:37 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-03-10 10:37 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-03-10 14:57 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-10 14:57 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` [RFC PATCH v15 02/11] ARM: qcom: Add Subsystem Power Manager (SPM) driver Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-10 17:26 ` Kumar Gala
2015-03-10 17:26 ` Kumar Gala
2015-03-10 18:51 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-10 18:51 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-12 22:50 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-12 22:50 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-16 21:51 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-03-16 21:51 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-03-16 22:51 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-16 22:51 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` [RFC PATCH v15 04/11] ARM: cpuidle: Register cpuidle_ops for QCOM cpus Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-11 18:16 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-03-11 18:16 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-03-12 12:34 ` Daniel Lezcano
2015-03-12 12:34 ` Daniel Lezcano
2015-03-12 15:06 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-12 15:06 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-13 9:57 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2015-03-13 9:57 ` Daniel Lezcano
2015-03-09 15:16 ` [PATCH v15 05/11] ARM: dts: qcom: Add power-controller device node for 8074 Krait CPUs Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` [PATCH v15 07/11] ARM: dts: qcom: Update power-controller device node for 8064 " Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` [PATCH v15 08/11] ARM: dts: qcom: Add idle states device nodes for 8074 Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
[not found] ` <1425914206-22295-1-git-send-email-lina.iyer-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2015-03-09 15:16 ` [PATCH v15 03/11] ARM: cpuidle: qcom: Add documentation for qcom cpuidle states Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` [PATCH v15 06/11] ARM: dts: qcom: Add power-controller device node for 8084 Krait CPUs Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` [PATCH v15 09/11] ARM: dts: qcom: Add idle states device nodes for 8084 Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` [PATCH v15 10/11] ARM: dts: qcom: Add idle state device nodes for 8064 Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` [PATCH v15 11/11] ARM: qcom: Update defconfig Lina Iyer
2015-03-09 15:16 ` Lina Iyer
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=5502B47E.4010106@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=galak@codeaurora.org \
--cc=khilman@linaro.org \
--cc=lina.iyer@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=msivasub@codeaurora.org \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.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 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.