From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: [PATCH 1/7] cpufreq: Rework two functions related to CPU offline
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 16:03:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <31290788.SNH4WFh3YK@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3874727.Jpay9zgokc@vostro.rjw.lan>
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Since __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare() and __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish()
are about CPU offline rather than about CPU removal, rename them to
cpufreq_offline_prepare() and cpufreq_offline_finish(), respectively.
Also change their argument from a struct device pointer to a CPU
number, because they use the CPU number only internally anyway
and make them void as their return values are ignored.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 32 ++++++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1398,10 +1398,8 @@ out_release_rwsem:
return ret;
}
-static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(struct device *dev)
+static void cpufreq_offline_prepare(unsigned int cpu)
{
- unsigned int cpu = dev->id;
- int ret = 0;
struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
pr_debug("%s: unregistering CPU %u\n", __func__, cpu);
@@ -1409,11 +1407,11 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(
policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
if (!policy) {
pr_debug("%s: No cpu_data found\n", __func__);
- return -EINVAL;
+ return;
}
if (has_target()) {
- ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP);
+ int ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP);
if (ret)
pr_err("%s: Failed to stop governor\n", __func__);
}
@@ -1434,7 +1432,7 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(
/* Start governor again for active policy */
if (!policy_is_inactive(policy)) {
if (has_target()) {
- ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_START);
+ int ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_START);
if (!ret)
ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS);
@@ -1444,28 +1442,24 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(
} else if (cpufreq_driver->stop_cpu) {
cpufreq_driver->stop_cpu(policy);
}
-
- return ret;
}
-static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish(struct device *dev)
+static void cpufreq_offline_finish(unsigned int cpu)
{
- unsigned int cpu = dev->id;
- int ret;
struct cpufreq_policy *policy = per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data, cpu);
if (!policy) {
pr_debug("%s: No cpu_data found\n", __func__);
- return -EINVAL;
+ return;
}
/* Only proceed for inactive policies */
if (!policy_is_inactive(policy))
- return 0;
+ return;
/* If cpu is last user of policy, free policy */
if (has_target()) {
- ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT);
+ int ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT);
if (ret)
pr_err("%s: Failed to exit governor\n", __func__);
}
@@ -1477,8 +1471,6 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish(s
*/
if (cpufreq_driver->exit)
cpufreq_driver->exit(policy);
-
- return 0;
}
/**
@@ -1495,8 +1487,8 @@ static int cpufreq_remove_dev(struct dev
return 0;
if (cpu_online(cpu)) {
- __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(dev);
- __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish(dev);
+ cpufreq_offline_prepare(cpu);
+ cpufreq_offline_finish(cpu);
}
cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, policy->real_cpus);
@@ -2379,11 +2371,11 @@ static int cpufreq_cpu_callback(struct n
break;
case CPU_DOWN_PREPARE:
- __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(dev);
+ cpufreq_offline_prepare(cpu);
break;
case CPU_POST_DEAD:
- __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish(dev);
+ cpufreq_offline_finish(cpu);
break;
case CPU_DOWN_FAILED:
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-27 13:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-23 0:00 [PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: Better separation of device addition/removal and online/offline paths Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-23 0:01 ` [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: Rename two functions related to CPU offline Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-23 6:40 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-23 0:04 ` [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: Separate CPU device removal from CPU online Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-23 6:39 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-23 20:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-24 2:19 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-24 19:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:01 ` [PATCH 0/7] cpufreq: Better separation of device addition/removal and online/offline paths Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2015-07-27 14:42 ` [PATCH 1/7] cpufreq: Rework two functions related to CPU offline Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:03 ` [PATCH 2/7] cpufreq: Drop cpufreq_policy_restore() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:48 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:04 ` [PATCH 3/7] cpufreq: Drop unnecessary label from cpufreq_add_dev() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:52 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:05 ` [PATCH 4/7] cpufreq: Drop unused dev argument from two functions Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:53 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:06 ` [PATCH 5/7] cpufreq: Do not update related_cpus on every policy activation Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:56 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:07 ` [PATCH 6/7] cpufreq: Pass CPU number to cpufreq_policy_alloc() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:58 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 14:09 ` [PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device removal from CPU online Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 15:06 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 20:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 21:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-28 2:06 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-28 14:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 21:55 ` [Update][PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device registration " Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-28 2:20 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-28 14:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29 1:03 ` [Update 2x][PATCH " Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29 1:08 ` [PATCH] cpufreq: Replace recover_policy with new_policy in cpufreq_online() Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29 5:38 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-29 5:32 ` [Update 2x][PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device registration from CPU online Viresh Kumar
2015-07-29 14:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29 14:07 ` 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=31290788.SNH4WFh3YK@vostro.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®