From: viresh.kumar@linaro.org (Viresh Kumar)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 10/10] cpufreq: mvebu: Use generic platdev driver
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 20:59:14 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160425152914.GI6104@vireshk-i7> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17150729.NF4MViUffk@wuerfel>
On 25-04-16, 17:26, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 25 April 2016 18:26:05 Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 25-04-16, 14:53, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Monday 25 April 2016 08:30:41 Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >
> > > I realize that the ordering is fixed through the way that the kernel
> > > is linked, my worry is more about someone changing the code in some
> > > way because it's not obvious from reading the code that the
> > > dependency exists. If either the armada_xp_pmsu_cpufreq_init()
> > > initcall gets changed so it does not always get called, or the
> > > cpufreq_dt_platdev_init() initcall gets changed so it comes a little
> > > earlier, things will break.
> >
> > cpufreq-dt will just error out in that case, because it wouldn't find
> > any OPPs registered to the OPP-core. It *shouldn't* crash and if it
> > does, then we have a problem to fix.
>
> Ok.
>
> > > > The other thing that can happen is that armada_xp_pmsu_cpufreq_init()
> > > > call can fail. In that case, most of the times cpufreq-dt ->init()
> > > > will fail as well, so even that is fine for me.
> > > >
> > > > And, so I think we can keep this patch as is.
> > >
> > > What are the downsides of moving armada_xp_pmsu_cpufreq_init()
> > > into drivers/cpufreq?
> >
> > More special code :)
>
> Of course the special code still exists, it seems more like neither of
> us wants to have it in the portion of the kernel that he maintains ;-)
Hehe.. But after $subject patch, we don't have any special code for
creating the device, isn't it?
> Maybe the mvebu maintainers have a preference where they'd like the
> code to be, they are the ones that are most impacted if anything
> goes wrong.
What code are you talking about? Initializing the OPPs or adding the
cpufreq-dt device? The first one (or whatever is left now in that
function) can stay anywhere, even as a cpufreq driver. I was talking
about the fact that we don't have a sequence problem to solve here.
--
viresh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-25 15:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <cover.1461228504.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
2016-04-21 8:59 ` [PATCH 08/10] mvebu: Use dev_pm_opp_set_sharing_cpus() to mark OPP tables as shared Viresh Kumar
2016-04-22 22:24 ` Stephen Boyd
2016-04-21 8:59 ` [PATCH 10/10] cpufreq: mvebu: Use generic platdev driver Viresh Kumar
2016-04-22 22:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-04-25 3:00 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-04-25 12:53 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-04-25 12:56 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-04-25 15:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-04-25 15:29 ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2016-04-25 15:46 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-04-25 15:55 ` Thomas Petazzoni
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=20160425152914.GI6104@vireshk-i7 \
--to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox