Re: [PATCH 1/3] opp: core: add regulators enable and disable

[Kamil Konieczny <k.konieczny@partner.samsung.com>]

On 11.07.2019 08:22, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 08-07-19, 16:11, k.konieczny@partner.samsung.com wrote:
>> From: Kamil Konieczny <k.konieczny@partner.samsung.com>
>>
>> Add enable regulators to dev_pm_opp_set_regulators() and disable
>> regulators to dev_pm_opp_put_regulators(). This prepares for
>> converting exynos-bus devfreq driver to use dev_pm_opp_set_rate().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kamil Konieczny <k.konieczny@partner.samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/opp/core.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/opp/core.c b/drivers/opp/core.c
>> index 0e7703fe733f..947cac452854 100644
>> --- a/drivers/opp/core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/opp/core.c
>> @@ -1580,8 +1580,19 @@ struct opp_table *dev_pm_opp_set_regulators(struct device *dev,
>>  	if (ret)
>>  		goto free_regulators;
>>  
>> +	for (i = 0; i < opp_table->regulator_count; i++) {
>> +		ret = regulator_enable(opp_table->regulators[i]);
>> +		if (ret < 0)
>> +			goto disable;
>> +	}
> 
> What about doing this in the same loop of regulator_get_optional() ?

yes, this is good, it will simplify code

>> +
>>  	return opp_table;
>>  
>> +disable:
>> +	while (i != 0)
>> +		regulator_disable(opp_table->regulators[--i]);
>> +
>> +	i = opp_table->regulator_count;
> 
> You also need to call _free_set_opp_data() here.

good catch
if I move enable in loop above, then this will not be needed

>>  free_regulators:
>>  	while (i != 0)
>>  		regulator_put(opp_table->regulators[--i]);
>> @@ -1609,6 +1620,8 @@ void dev_pm_opp_put_regulators(struct opp_table *opp_table)
>>  
>>  	/* Make sure there are no concurrent readers while updating opp_table */
>>  	WARN_ON(!list_empty(&opp_table->opp_list));
> 
> Preserve the blank line here.
> 
>> +	for (i = opp_table->regulator_count - 1; i >= 0; i--)
>> +		regulator_disable(opp_table->regulators[i]);
>>  
>>  	for (i = opp_table->regulator_count - 1; i >= 0; i--)
>>  		regulator_put(opp_table->regulators[i]);
> 
> Only single loop should be sufficient for this.

you are right, I will do this in single loop

I will send v2

-- 
Best regards,
Kamil Konieczny
Samsung R&D Institute Poland