From: juri.lelli@arm.com (Juri Lelli)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH V2 1/5] arch_topology: Get rid of "cap_parsing_done"
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 17:44:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170622164410.brenzszdgweucshj@e106622-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170622142925.GD6314@vireshk-i7>
On 22/06/17 19:59, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 22-06-17, 10:44, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 21/06/17 10:16, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > We can reuse "cap_parsing_failed" instead of keeping an additional
> > > variable here.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 5 ++---
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > > index d1c33a85059e..8239a6232808 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > > @@ -161,7 +161,6 @@ int __init topology_parse_cpu_capacity(struct device_node *cpu_node, int cpu)
> > >
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ
> > > static cpumask_var_t cpus_to_visit;
> > > -static bool cap_parsing_done;
> > > static void parsing_done_workfn(struct work_struct *work);
> > > static DECLARE_WORK(parsing_done_work, parsing_done_workfn);
> > >
> > > @@ -173,7 +172,7 @@ init_cpu_capacity_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > > struct cpufreq_policy *policy = data;
> > > int cpu;
> > >
> > > - if (cap_parsing_failed || cap_parsing_done)
> > > + if (cap_parsing_failed)
> > > return 0;
> > >
> > > switch (val) {
> > > @@ -193,7 +192,7 @@ init_cpu_capacity_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > > topology_normalize_cpu_scale();
> > > kfree(raw_capacity);
> > > pr_debug("cpu_capacity: parsing done\n");
> > > - cap_parsing_done = true;
> > > + cap_parsing_failed = true;
> >
> > But we didn't actually failed here, right?
>
> Yeah. So I can actually move this patch to the end of the series and
> cap_parsing_done can be dropped then as we will end up using
> !raw_capacity instead. And the end result will stay the same.
>
OK.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-22 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-21 4:46 [PATCH V2 0/5] arch_topology: Minor cleanups Viresh Kumar
2017-06-21 4:46 ` [PATCH V2 1/5] arch_topology: Get rid of "cap_parsing_done" Viresh Kumar
2017-06-22 9:44 ` Juri Lelli
2017-06-22 14:29 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-06-22 16:44 ` Juri Lelli [this message]
2017-06-21 4:46 ` [PATCH V2 2/5] arch_topology: Don't break lines unnecessarily Viresh Kumar
2017-06-21 4:46 ` [PATCH V2 3/5] arch_topology: Covert switch block to if block Viresh Kumar
2017-06-21 4:46 ` [PATCH V2 4/5] arch_topology: Return 0 or -ve errors from topology_parse_cpu_capacity() Viresh Kumar
2017-06-22 9:39 ` Juri Lelli
2017-06-22 14:28 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-06-22 16:43 ` Juri Lelli
2017-06-21 4:46 ` [PATCH V2 5/5] arch_topology: Localize cap_parsing_failed to topology_parse_cpu_capacity() 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=20170622164410.brenzszdgweucshj@e106622-lin \
--to=juri.lelli@arm.com \
--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