Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] mfd: db8500-prcmu: Use cpufreq_for_each_entry macro for iteration

Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] mfd: db8500-prcmu: Use cpufreq_for_each_entry macro for iteration

[Lee Jones]

> > > The cpufreq core now supports the cpufreq_for_each_entry macro helper 
> > > for iteration over the cpufreq_frequency_table, so use it. 
> > > 
> > > It should have no functional changes. 
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr> 
> > > --- 
> >
> > It would be good to have a changelog which describes the differences 
> > between the versions, so we can keep track. 
> >
> > >  drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c | 19 ++++++++----------- 
> > >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) 
> >
> > So it looks like I already applied v2 of this patch to my tree. What 
> > changed in v3 and v4? Should I remove that patch from MFD and apply 
> > this one instead?
> 
> I'm sorry for the confusion.
> I sent v3 only for patches 1/8 and 3/8.
> So, I was asked by Rafael to resend the entire series as v4
> in order to be clear which is the latest version in each patch.
> Unfortunately, I omit the change log :(
> 
> The specific patch (5/8) is unchanged since v2.
> 
> I'm sorry for the inconvenience.

That's okay, thanks for clarifying.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

[PATCH v4 5/8] mfd: db8500-prcmu: Use cpufreq_for_each_entry macro for iteration

[Stratos Karafotis]

The cpufreq core now supports the cpufreq_for_each_entry macro helper
for iteration over the cpufreq_frequency_table, so use it.

It should have no functional changes.

Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
---
 drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c b/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
index 7694e07..b11fdd6 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
@@ -1734,18 +1734,17 @@ static struct cpufreq_frequency_table db8500_cpufreq_table[] = {
 
 static long round_armss_rate(unsigned long rate)
 {
+	struct cpufreq_frequency_table *pos;
 	long freq = 0;
-	int i = 0;
 
 	/* cpufreq table frequencies is in KHz. */
 	rate = rate / 1000;
 
 	/* Find the corresponding arm opp from the cpufreq table. */
-	while (db8500_cpufreq_table[i].frequency != CPUFREQ_TABLE_END) {
-		freq = db8500_cpufreq_table[i].frequency;
+	cpufreq_for_each_entry(pos, db8500_cpufreq_table) {
+		freq = pos->frequency;
 		if (freq == rate)
 			break;
-		i++;
 	}
 
 	/* Return the last valid value, even if a match was not found. */
@@ -1886,23 +1885,21 @@ static void set_clock_rate(u8 clock, unsigned long rate)
 
 static int set_armss_rate(unsigned long rate)
 {
-	int i = 0;
+	struct cpufreq_frequency_table *pos;
 
 	/* cpufreq table frequencies is in KHz. */
 	rate = rate / 1000;
 
 	/* Find the corresponding arm opp from the cpufreq table. */
-	while (db8500_cpufreq_table[i].frequency != CPUFREQ_TABLE_END) {
-		if (db8500_cpufreq_table[i].frequency == rate)
+	cpufreq_for_each_entry(pos, db8500_cpufreq_table)
+		if (pos->frequency == rate)
 			break;
-		i++;
-	}
 
-	if (db8500_cpufreq_table[i].frequency != rate)
+	if (pos->frequency != rate)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	/* Set the new arm opp. */
-	return db8500_prcmu_set_arm_opp(db8500_cpufreq_table[i].driver_data);
+	return db8500_prcmu_set_arm_opp(pos->driver_data);
 }
 
 static int set_plldsi_rate(unsigned long rate)
-- 
1.9.0

Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] mfd: db8500-prcmu: Use cpufreq_for_each_entry macro for iteration

[Lee Jones]

> The cpufreq core now supports the cpufreq_for_each_entry macro helper
> for iteration over the cpufreq_frequency_table, so use it.
> 
> It should have no functional changes.

> Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
> ---

It would be good to have a changelog which describes the differences
between the versions, so we can keep track.

>  drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

So it looks like I already applied v2 of this patch to my tree. What
changed in v3 and v4? Should I remove that patch from MFD and apply
this one instead?

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] mfd: db8500-prcmu: Use cpufreq_for_each_entry macro for iteration

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 08:15:41 AM Lee Jones wrote:
> > The cpufreq core now supports the cpufreq_for_each_entry macro helper
> > for iteration over the cpufreq_frequency_table, so use it.
> > 
> > It should have no functional changes.
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
> > ---
> 
> It would be good to have a changelog which describes the differences
> between the versions, so we can keep track.
> 
> >  drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> So it looks like I already applied v2 of this patch to my tree. What
> changed in v3 and v4? Should I remove that patch from MFD and apply
> this one instead?

The reason why v4 was sent is because I asked for it.

And if you applied [5/8] without [1/8], it won't work, because the macro is
introduced by that patch.

If that's the case, please drop [5/8] and let me handle the entire series.

Kind regards,
Rafael

Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] mfd: db8500-prcmu: Use cpufreq_for_each_entry macro for iteration

[Lee Jones]

On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 08:15:41 AM Lee Jones wrote:
> > > The cpufreq core now supports the cpufreq_for_each_entry macro helper
> > > for iteration over the cpufreq_frequency_table, so use it.
> > > 
> > > It should have no functional changes.
> > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
> > > ---
> > 
> > It would be good to have a changelog which describes the differences
> > between the versions, so we can keep track.
> > 
> > >  drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
> > >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > 
> > So it looks like I already applied v2 of this patch to my tree. What
> > changed in v3 and v4? Should I remove that patch from MFD and apply
> > this one instead?
> 
> The reason why v4 was sent is because I asked for it.
> 
> And if you applied [5/8] without [1/8], it won't work, because the macro is
> introduced by that patch.

That's right, which is why I mailed you about it:

  > > > Applied untested by me.
  > >
  > > Wouldn't build. Let it go via Rafael.
  >
  > Rafael, would you mind creating a branch from this patch set that we
  > can both pull from please?

> If that's the case, please drop [5/8] and let me handle the entire series.

I'm happy for you to apply the series and send me a pull-request for
either a) the entire series or b) just the patches which touch MFD and
any subsequent decencies. Or I can apply them and send you one.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] mfd: db8500-prcmu: Use cpufreq_for_each_entry macro for iteration

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 12:27:17 PM Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 08:15:41 AM Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > The cpufreq core now supports the cpufreq_for_each_entry macro helper
> > > > for iteration over the cpufreq_frequency_table, so use it.
> > > > 
> > > > It should have no functional changes.
> > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
> > > > ---
> > > 
> > > It would be good to have a changelog which describes the differences
> > > between the versions, so we can keep track.
> > > 
> > > >  drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
> > > >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > So it looks like I already applied v2 of this patch to my tree. What
> > > changed in v3 and v4? Should I remove that patch from MFD and apply
> > > this one instead?
> > 
> > The reason why v4 was sent is because I asked for it.
> > 
> > And if you applied [5/8] without [1/8], it won't work, because the macro is
> > introduced by that patch.
> 
> That's right, which is why I mailed you about it:
> 
>   > > > Applied untested by me.
>   > >
>   > > Wouldn't build. Let it go via Rafael.
>   >
>   > Rafael, would you mind creating a branch from this patch set that we
>   > can both pull from please?
> 
> > If that's the case, please drop [5/8] and let me handle the entire series.
> 
> I'm happy for you to apply the series and send me a pull-request for
> either a) the entire series or b) just the patches which touch MFD and
> any subsequent decencies. Or I can apply them and send you one.

OK, I'll create a separate branch with those patches and will let you know
where it is.

Kind regards,
Rafael

Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] mfd: db8500-prcmu: Use cpufreq_for_each_entry macro for iteration

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 01:49:31 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 12:27:17 PM Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 08:15:41 AM Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > > The cpufreq core now supports the cpufreq_for_each_entry macro helper
> > > > > for iteration over the cpufreq_frequency_table, so use it.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It should have no functional changes.
> > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>
> > > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > It would be good to have a changelog which describes the differences
> > > > between the versions, so we can keep track.
> > > > 
> > > > >  drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
> > > > >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > So it looks like I already applied v2 of this patch to my tree. What
> > > > changed in v3 and v4? Should I remove that patch from MFD and apply
> > > > this one instead?
> > > 
> > > The reason why v4 was sent is because I asked for it.
> > > 
> > > And if you applied [5/8] without [1/8], it won't work, because the macro is
> > > introduced by that patch.
> > 
> > That's right, which is why I mailed you about it:
> > 
> >   > > > Applied untested by me.
> >   > >
> >   > > Wouldn't build. Let it go via Rafael.
> >   >
> >   > Rafael, would you mind creating a branch from this patch set that we
> >   > can both pull from please?
> > 
> > > If that's the case, please drop [5/8] and let me handle the entire series.
> > 
> > I'm happy for you to apply the series and send me a pull-request for
> > either a) the entire series or b) just the patches which touch MFD and
> > any subsequent decencies. Or I can apply them and send you one.
> 
> OK, I'll create a separate branch with those patches and will let you know
> where it is.

This material is on the cpufreq-macros branch of the linux-pm.git tree now, so

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git cpufreq-macros

will be safe to pull from going forward.

Thanks!

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.