From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40536C04EB8 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 09:27:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1E9420851 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 09:27:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="alIzSAYl"; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="Y46p9fPA" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E1E9420851 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726041AbeLDJ1c (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Dec 2018 04:27:32 -0500 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:54694 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725857AbeLDJ1b (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Dec 2018 04:27:31 -0500 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 669B46130A; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 09:27:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1543915650; bh=GQlyJYtScwIswUqB6lsPvoF5YSo9l8iOXkHqArIfrC0=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=alIzSAYlqm1YSYz774LpP38fCLRIPiXKrLXe9AfNYBTR6zgIC2zwO16L6UXIh2m24 pjiA0fy8T6TeKaMG35CzAW0Kof/jSI+RY7YCmQuESyE9GJOHHxpowyAujlFS4cMLd+ zP8rlm5iw6jnqvQPGUQzmICZQNDiDgeMFE5E1om4= Received: from [192.168.225.247] (unknown [49.33.209.251]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tdas@smtp.codeaurora.org) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 30928607B5; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 09:27:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1543915649; bh=GQlyJYtScwIswUqB6lsPvoF5YSo9l8iOXkHqArIfrC0=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Y46p9fPABLSpCudOVmznEp7MudlNnK4l4Pexuo5ONbbxCAU8T0TocL5ibnWfXRTGI n9r8dhxQID+yM6o18uQicRUrF40hG5pVA7DPAwLSHU0ESKZT9y/AUxYHM2fzrJ011K F1Wdc/dOlQxvtqcGQMzHgUgvmK8HQss/WManGeMI= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 30928607B5 Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=tdas@codeaurora.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 2/2] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq HW driver To: Viresh Kumar Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Boyd , Rajendra Nayak , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, skannan@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, evgreen@google.com, Stephen Boyd References: <1543722903-10989-1-git-send-email-tdas@codeaurora.org> <1543722903-10989-3-git-send-email-tdas@codeaurora.org> <20181204051231.mm5ixli7ckpfzvd4@vireshk-i7> From: Taniya Das Message-ID: <99d25f02-e595-d4e8-25c4-3c4c206f79a6@codeaurora.org> Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 14:57:19 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181204051231.mm5ixli7ckpfzvd4@vireshk-i7> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello Viresh, On 12/4/2018 10:42 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Hi Taniya, > > Sorry that I haven't been reviewing it much from last few iterations as I was > letting others get this into a better shape. Thanks for your efforts.. > > On 02-12-18, 09:25, Taniya Das wrote: >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c > >> +struct cpufreq_qcom { >> + struct cpufreq_frequency_table *table; >> + void __iomem *perf_state_reg; >> + cpumask_t related_cpus; >> +}; >> + >> +static struct cpufreq_qcom *qcom_freq_domain_map[NR_CPUS]; > > Now that the code is much more simplified, I am not sure if you need this > per-cpu structure at all. The only place where you are using it is in > qcom_cpufreq_hw_cpu_init() and probe(). Why not merge qcom_cpu_resources_init() > completely into qcom_cpufreq_hw_cpu_init() and get rid of this structure > entirely ? > Yes, we still would require the per-cpu. -- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation. --