Re: [PATCH] x86: new Intel Atom SoC power management controller driver

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

On Fri, 2014-03-07 at 10:08 +0800, Li, Aubrey wrote:

> The Power Management Controller (PMC) controls many of the power
> management features present in the SoC. This driver provides
> interface to configure the Power Management Controller (PMC).

More trivial notes.

Nothing really that should stop this from being applied.

> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/pmc_atom.c b/arch/x86/kernel/pmc_atom.c

I still think that
#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
is useful here.

> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/init.h>
[]
> +#define	DRIVER_NAME "pmc_atom"

Maybe

#define DRIVER_NAME KBUILD_MODNAME

too

> +struct pmc_dev_map {
> +       char *name;
> +       u32 bit_mask;
> +};
> 
> +static struct pmc_dev_map dev_map[] = {

static const to reduce data?

struct pmc_dev_map {
	const char *name;
	u32 bit_mask;
};

> +static struct pmc_dev_map dev_map[] = {

static const struct pmc_dev_map dev_map[] = {

> +	{"0  - LPSS1_F0_DMA",		BIT_LPSS1_F0_DMA},
> +	{"1  - LPSS1_F1_PWM1",		BIT_LPSS1_F1_PWM1},

[]

> +static void pmc_power_off(void)
> +{
[]
> +	pr_info("%s: Preparing to enter system sleep state S5\n", DRIVER_NAME);

This is larger code than using pr_fmt

> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
> +static int pmc_dev_state_show(struct seq_file *s, void *unused)
> +{
[]
> +		seq_printf(s, "Dev: %-32s\tState: %s [%s]\n",
> +			dev_map[dev_index].name,
> +			dev_map[dev_index].bit_mask & func_dis_index ?
> +			"Disabled" : "Enabled ",
> +			(d3_sts_index & dev_map[dev_index].bit_mask) ?
> +			"D3" : "D0");

This reverses the order of the 1st and 2nd trigraph test
and to me would be easier to read like:

		seq_printf(s, "Dev: %-32s\tState: %s [%s]\n",
			dev_map[dev_index].name,
			dev_map[dev_index].bit_mask & func_dis_index ?
			"Disabled" : "Enabled ",
			dev_map[dev_index].bit_mask & d3_sts_index ?
			"D3" : "D0");