From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:13:02 +0100 Subject: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] OMAP4 cpuidle cleanup In-Reply-To: References: <1332322070-24577-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <4F69A872.50203@ti.com> Message-ID: <4F69E1EE.708@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/21/2012 02:19 PM, Jean Pihet wrote: > Hi Santosh, Daniel, > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Santosh Shilimkar > wrote: >> Daniel, >> >> On Wednesday 21 March 2012 02:57 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >>> This patchset is a proposition to improve a bit the code. >>> The changes are code cleanup and does not change the behavior of the >>> driver itself. >>> >>> A couple a things call my intention. Why the cpuidle device is set for cpu0 only >>> and why the WFI is not used ? >>> >>> Daniel Lezcano (7): >>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Remove unused valid field >>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Declare the states with the driver declaration >>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Remove the cpuidle_params_table table >>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - fix static omap4_idle_data declaration >>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Initialize omap4_idle_data at compile time >>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - use the omap4_idle_data variable directly >>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - remove omap4_idle_data initialization at boot >>> time >>> >> The series looks fine to me in general. This clean-up is applicable >> for OMAP3 cpuidle code as well. >> >> I want Jean to look at this series because some of his earlier >> clean up has introduced those custom functions which >> are getting removed in this series. > I am OK with the patch set, I only have minor remarks to the individual patches. > > Reviewed-by: Jean Pihet Thanks for the review Jean. >> >> > > Thanks! > Jean -- Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog