From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933955AbaEGNeV (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 May 2014 09:34:21 -0400 Received: from sema.semaphore.gr ([78.46.194.137]:53096 "EHLO sema.semaphore.gr" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932919AbaEGNeS (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 May 2014 09:34:18 -0400 Message-ID: <536A3654.20201@semaphore.gr> Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 16:34:12 +0300 From: Stratos Karafotis User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar CC: Geert Uytterhoeven , Jesper Nilsson , Hans-Christian Egtvedt , Dirk Brandewie , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "cpufreq@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , LKML , Randy Dunlap , "David S. Miller" , Linus Walleij , Simon Horman , Sekhar Nori , Samuel Ortiz , Linux-sh list Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/8] Introduce new cpufreq helper macros References: <535AC247.3070907@semaphore.gr> <5369220A.3030207@semaphore.gr> <4469396.zveA7sC36d@vostro.rjw.lan> In-Reply-To: <4469396.zveA7sC36d@vostro.rjw.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Rafael, On 07/05/2014 04:13 μμ, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, May 07, 2014 10:53:16 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: >> On 6 May 2014 23:25, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >>> My bad. I'm sorry for this. :( >>> >>> Rafael, >>> A solution could be to make cpufreq_next_valid an inline function in cpufreq.h, >>> but as Viresh mentioned this would be very inefficient because of multiple copies. >> >> That statement was true when we didn't had this problem.. >> >>> So, maybe it's better to revert the 2 patches that don't depend on CONFIG_CPU_FREQ: >>> >>> 4229e1c61a4a ("sh: clk: Use cpufreq_for_each_valid_entry macro for iteration") and >>> 04ae58645afa ("irda: sh_sir: Use cpufreq_for_each_valid_entry macro for iteration"). >> >> This doesn't look right. It can happen to some other drivers as well in future. >> So, there are two solutions I can think of: >> 1. move cpufreq_next_valid and rename it to __cpufreq_next_valid(). Also make it >> inline. Then create two versions of cpufreq_next_valid(), one inlined (only when >> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ=n) and other one in cpufreq.c (non- inlined).. >> >> But probably that would be called ugly by some people :) >> >> 2. Make cpufreq_next_valid() inline and forget about extra space it takes :) >> >> @Rafel: Let me know which one you like :) > > 2. > > Do you want me to resend the entire patch set or only patch 1/8? Thanks, Stratos