From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: plagnioj@jcrosoft.com (Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD)
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 16:04:06 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: at91: cpuidle: convert to platform driver
In-Reply-To: <1381593099-1184-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
References: <1381593099-1184-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <20131014140406.GH11420@ns203013.ovh.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 17:51 Sat 12 Oct     , Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> Use the platform driver model to separate the cpuidle specific code from
> the low level pm code. It allows to remove the dependency between
> these two components.
> 
> Tested-on usb-a9263 (at91sam9263)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c |   29 +++++++++++++++--------------
>  arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c      |   16 +++++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c
> index 4ec6a6d..6cdc76d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c
> @@ -21,26 +21,17 @@
>  #include <linux/export.h>
>  #include <asm/proc-fns.h>
>  #include <asm/cpuidle.h>
> -#include <mach/cpu.h>
> -
> -#include "pm.h"
>  
>  #define AT91_MAX_STATES	2
>  
> +static void (*at91_standby)(void);
> +
>  /* Actual code that puts the SoC in different idle states */
>  static int at91_enter_idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
>  			struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
>  			       int index)
>  {
> -	if (cpu_is_at91rm9200())
> -		at91rm9200_standby();
> -	else if (cpu_is_at91sam9g45())
> -		at91sam9g45_standby();
> -	else if (cpu_is_at91sam9263())
> -		at91sam9263_standby();
> -	else
> -		at91sam9_standby();
> -
> +	at91_standby();
>  	return index;
>  }
>  
> @@ -60,9 +51,19 @@ static struct cpuidle_driver at91_idle_driver = {
>  };
>  
>  /* Initialize CPU idle by registering the idle states */
> -static int __init at91_init_cpuidle(void)
> +static int __init at91_cpuidle_probe(struct platform_device *dev)
>  {
> +	at91_standby = (void *)(dev->dev.platform_data);
> +	
>  	return cpuidle_register(&at91_idle_driver, NULL);
>  }
>  
> -device_initcall(at91_init_cpuidle);
> +static struct platform_driver at91_cpuidle_driver = {
> +	.driver = {
> +		.name = "cpuidle-at91",
> +		.owner = THIS_MODULE,
> +	},
> +	.probe = at91_cpuidle_probe,
> +};
> +
> +module_platform_driver(at91_cpuidle_driver);
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
> index 15afb5d..debdbf8 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
> @@ -314,6 +314,10 @@ static const struct platform_suspend_ops at91_pm_ops = {
>  	.end	= at91_pm_end,
>  };
>  
> +static struct platform_device at91_cpuidle_device = {
> +	.name = "cpuidle-at91",
> +};
> +
>  static int __init at91_pm_init(void)
>  {
>  #ifdef CONFIG_AT91_SLOW_CLOCK
> @@ -323,8 +327,18 @@ static int __init at91_pm_init(void)
>  	pr_info("AT91: Power Management%s\n", (slow_clock ? " (with slow clock mode)" : ""));
>  
>  	/* AT91RM9200 SDRAM low-power mode cannot be used with self-refresh. */
> -	if (cpu_is_at91rm9200())
> +	if (cpu_is_at91rm9200()) {
> +		at91_cpuidle_device.dev.platform_data = at91rm9200_standby;
>  		at91_ramc_write(0, AT91RM9200_SDRAMC_LPR, 0);
> +	} else if (cpu_is_at91sam9g45()) {
> +		at91_cpuidle_device.dev.platform_data = at91sam9g45_standby;
> +	} else if (cpu_is_at91sam9263()) {
> +		at91_cpuidle_device.dev.platform_data = at91sam9263_standby;
> +	} else {
> +		at91_cpuidle_device.dev.platform_data = at91sam9_standby;
no this is too dangerous when adding new SoC

you must list the supported SoC

and I prefer to move this code to the SoC init structure

so we can drop the if/else if/elsee

and drop the issue of adding new and the arch_initcall

Best Regards,
J.
> +	}
> +	
> +	platform_device_register(&at91_cpuidle_device);
>  
>  	suspend_set_ops(&at91_pm_ops);
>  
> -- 
> 1.7.9.5
>