From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Javi Merino <javi.merino@kernel.org>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@gmail.com>,
linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: remove cpufreq_cooling_get_level()
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 11:55:16 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170412062516.GC5910@vireshk-i7> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170411174342.GC5528@localhost.localdomain>
On 11-04-17, 10:43, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:59:40AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > There is only one user of cpufreq_cooling_get_level() and that already
> > has pointer to the cpufreq_dev structure. It can directly call
> > get_level() instead and we can get rid of cpufreq_cooling_get_level().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 33 +--------------------------------
> > include/linux/cpu_cooling.h | 6 ------
> > 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 38 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > index e2931c20c309..99dc6833de75 100644
> > --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > @@ -137,37 +137,6 @@ static unsigned long get_level(struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_dev,
> > }
> >
> > /**
> > - * cpufreq_cooling_get_level - for a given cpu, return the cooling level.
> > - * @cpu: cpu for which the level is required
> > - * @freq: the frequency of interest
> > - *
> > - * This function will match the cooling level corresponding to the
> > - * requested @freq and return it.
> > - *
> > - * Return: The matched cooling level on success or THERMAL_CSTATE_INVALID
> > - * otherwise.
> > - */
> > -unsigned long cpufreq_cooling_get_level(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int freq)
> > -{
> > - struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_dev;
> > -
> > - mutex_lock(&cooling_list_lock);
> > - list_for_each_entry(cpufreq_dev, &cpufreq_dev_list, node) {
> > - if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &cpufreq_dev->allowed_cpus)) {
> > - unsigned long level = get_level(cpufreq_dev, freq);
> > -
> > - mutex_unlock(&cooling_list_lock);
> > - return level;
> > - }
> > - }
> > - mutex_unlock(&cooling_list_lock);
> > -
> > - pr_err("%s: cpu:%d not part of any cooling device\n", __func__, cpu);
> > - return THERMAL_CSTATE_INVALID;
> > -}
> > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpufreq_cooling_get_level);
> > -
> > -/**
> > * cpufreq_thermal_notifier - notifier callback for cpufreq policy change.
> > * @nb: struct notifier_block * with callback info.
> > * @event: value showing cpufreq event for which this function invoked.
> > @@ -698,7 +667,7 @@ static int cpufreq_power2state(struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> > normalised_power = (dyn_power * 100) / last_load;
> > target_freq = cpu_power_to_freq(cpufreq_dev, normalised_power);
> >
> > - *state = cpufreq_cooling_get_level(cpu, target_freq);
> > + *state = get_level(cpufreq_dev, target_freq);
>
> Did I miss something or we are loosing semantics here?
I just got rid of an unnecessary wrapper routine. That's it. There shouldn't be
any functional change after this patch.
> I guess the idea at this point is to get the level corresponding to the
> frequency on a specific cpu. Let's have a look on get_level()..
>
> I guess now we can rely on the freq table held in the
> cpufreq_cooling_device..
I am not sure I understood your concerns here :(
--
viresh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-12 6:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-16 5:26 [PATCH 00/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: improve interaction with cpufreq core Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 01/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: Avoid accessing potentially freed structures Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 02/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: rearrange globals Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 03/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: Replace cpufreq_device with cpufreq_dev Viresh Kumar
2017-04-11 17:33 ` Eduardo Valentin
2017-04-12 6:16 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 04/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: replace cool_dev with cdev Viresh Kumar
2017-04-11 17:35 ` Eduardo Valentin
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 05/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: remove cpufreq_cooling_get_level() Viresh Kumar
2017-04-11 17:43 ` Eduardo Valentin
2017-04-12 6:25 ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 06/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: get rid of a variable in cpufreq_set_cur_state() Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 07/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: use cpufreq_policy to register cooling device Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 08/17] cpufreq: create cpufreq_table_count_valid_entries() Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 09/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: store cpufreq policy Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 10/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: OPPs are registered for all CPUs Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 11/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: get rid of 'allowed_cpus' Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 12/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: merge frequency and power tables Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 13/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: create structure for idle time stats Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 14/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: get_level() can't fail Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 15/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: don't store cpu_dev in cpufreq_dev Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 16/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: 'freq' can't be zero in cpufreq_state2power() Viresh Kumar
2017-03-16 5:29 ` [PATCH 17/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: Rearrange struct cpufreq_cooling_device Viresh Kumar
2017-04-11 6:02 ` [PATCH 00/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: improve interaction with cpufreq core 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=20170412062516.GC5910@vireshk-i7 \
--to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=amit.kachhap@gmail.com \
--cc=edubezval@gmail.com \
--cc=javi.merino@kernel.org \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).