linux-pm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [Update 2x][PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device registration from CPU online
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 11:02:48 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150729053248.GC21493@linux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3091538.g8dYBumqSx@vostro.rjw.lan>

On 29-07-15, 03:03, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> +static int cpufreq_add_dev(struct device *dev, struct subsys_interface *sif)
> +{
> +	unsigned cpu = dev->id;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	dev_dbg(dev, "%s: adding CPU%u\n", __func__, cpu);
> +
> +	if (cpu_online(cpu)) {
> +		ret = cpufreq_online(cpu);

I will do return right here ...

> +	} else {

... and this else will not be required anymore.

> +		/*
> +		 * A hotplug notifier will follow and we will handle it as CPU
> +		 * online then.  For now, just create the sysfs link, unless
> +		 * there is no policy or the link is already present.
> +		 */
> +		struct cpufreq_policy *policy = per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data, cpu);
> +
> +		ret = policy && !cpumask_test_and_set_cpu(cpu, policy->real_cpus)
> +			? add_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, cpu) : 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}

Looks good otherwise.

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

-- 
viresh

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-07-29  5:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-23  0:00 [PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: Better separation of device addition/removal and online/offline paths Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-23  0:01 ` [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: Rename two functions related to CPU offline Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-23  6:40   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-23  0:04 ` [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: Separate CPU device removal from CPU online Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-23  6:39   ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-23 20:56     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-24  2:19       ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-24 19:54         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:01 ` [PATCH 0/7] cpufreq: Better separation of device addition/removal and online/offline paths Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:03   ` [PATCH 1/7] cpufreq: Rework two functions related to CPU offline Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:42     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:03   ` [PATCH 2/7] cpufreq: Drop cpufreq_policy_restore() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:48     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:04   ` [PATCH 3/7] cpufreq: Drop unnecessary label from cpufreq_add_dev() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:52     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:05   ` [PATCH 4/7] cpufreq: Drop unused dev argument from two functions Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:53     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:06   ` [PATCH 5/7] cpufreq: Do not update related_cpus on every policy activation Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:56     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:07   ` [PATCH 6/7] cpufreq: Pass CPU number to cpufreq_policy_alloc() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:58     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:09   ` [PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device removal from CPU online Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 15:06     ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 20:56       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 21:56         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-28  2:06           ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-28 14:22             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 21:55     ` [Update][PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device registration " Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-28  2:20       ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-28 14:13         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29  1:03       ` [Update 2x][PATCH " Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29  1:08         ` [PATCH] cpufreq: Replace recover_policy with new_policy in cpufreq_online() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29  5:38           ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-29  5:32         ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2015-07-29 14:02           ` [Update 2x][PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device registration from CPU online Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29 14:07             ` 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=20150729053248.GC21493@linux \
    --to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).