From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Subject: [PATCH v1 2/3] cpufreq: Split cpufreq_offline()
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 17:50:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2258373.ElGaqSPkdT@kreacher> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5585781.DvuYhMxLoT@kreacher>
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Split the "core" part running under the policy rwsem out of
cpufreq_offline() to allow the locking in cpufreq_remove_dev() to be
rearranged more easily.
As a side-effect this eliminates the unlock label that's not needed
any more.
No expected functional impact.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1576,21 +1576,10 @@ static int cpufreq_add_dev(struct device
return 0;
}
-static int cpufreq_offline(unsigned int cpu)
+static void __cpufreq_offline(unsigned int cpu, struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
- struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
int ret;
- pr_debug("%s: unregistering CPU %u\n", __func__, cpu);
-
- policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
- if (!policy) {
- pr_debug("%s: No cpu_data found\n", __func__);
- return 0;
- }
-
- down_write(&policy->rwsem);
-
if (has_target())
cpufreq_stop_governor(policy);
@@ -1608,7 +1597,7 @@ static int cpufreq_offline(unsigned int
pr_err("%s: Failed to start governor\n", __func__);
}
- goto unlock;
+ return;
}
if (has_target())
@@ -1635,8 +1624,24 @@ static int cpufreq_offline(unsigned int
cpufreq_driver->exit(policy);
policy->freq_table = NULL;
}
+}
+
+static int cpufreq_offline(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
+
+ pr_debug("%s: unregistering CPU %u\n", __func__, cpu);
+
+ policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
+ if (!policy) {
+ pr_debug("%s: No cpu_data found\n", __func__);
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ down_write(&policy->rwsem);
+
+ __cpufreq_offline(cpu, policy);
-unlock:
up_write(&policy->rwsem);
return 0;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-11 15:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-11 15:46 [PATCH v1 0/3] cpufreq: Locking-related changes in cpufreq_offline() and cpufreq_remove_dev() Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-05-11 15:48 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] cpufreq: Reorganize checks in cpufreq_offline() Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-05-12 7:05 ` Viresh Kumar
2022-05-11 15:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2022-05-12 7:28 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] cpufreq: Split cpufreq_offline() Viresh Kumar
2022-05-11 15:51 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] cpufreq: Rearrange locking in cpufreq_remove_dev() Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-05-12 7:42 ` 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=2258373.ElGaqSPkdT@kreacher \
--to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@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).