linux-kernel - [PATCH 28/34] cpufreq: s5pv210: remove calls to cpufreq_notify

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 16 Aug 2013 07:55:25 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	rjw@...k.pl
Cc:	linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, patches@...aro.org,
	cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>
Subject: [PATCH 28/34] cpufreq: s5pv210: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition()

Most of the drivers do following in their ->target_index() routines:

	struct cpufreq_freqs freqs;
	freqs.old = old freq...
	freqs.new = new freq...

	cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE);

	/* Change rate here */

	cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE);

This is replicated over all cpufreq drivers today and there doesn't exists a
good enough reason why this shouldn't be moved to cpufreq core instead.

Earlier patches have added support in cpufreq core to do cpufreq notification on
frequency change, this one removes it from this driver.

Some related minor cleanups are also done along with it.

Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/s5pv210-cpufreq.c | 16 ++++++----------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/s5pv210-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/s5pv210-cpufreq.c
index 76a4177..efa1080 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/s5pv210-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/s5pv210-cpufreq.c
@@ -26,7 +26,6 @@
 static struct clk *cpu_clk;
 static struct clk *dmc0_clk;
 static struct clk *dmc1_clk;
-static struct cpufreq_freqs freqs;
 static DEFINE_MUTEX(set_freq_lock);
 
 /* APLL M,P,S values for 1G/800Mhz */
@@ -179,6 +178,7 @@ static int s5pv210_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index)
 	unsigned int priv_index;
 	unsigned int pll_changing = 0;
 	unsigned int bus_speed_changing = 0;
+	unsigned int old_freq, new_freq;
 	int arm_volt, int_volt;
 	int ret = 0;
 
@@ -193,12 +193,12 @@ static int s5pv210_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index)
 		goto exit;
 	}
 
-	freqs.old = s5pv210_getspeed(0);
-	freqs.new = s5pv210_freq_table[index].frequency;
+	old_freq = s5pv210_getspeed(0);
+	new_freq = s5pv210_freq_table[index].frequency;
 
 	/* Finding current running level index */
 	if (cpufreq_frequency_table_target(policy, s5pv210_freq_table,
-					   freqs.old, CPUFREQ_RELATION_H,
+					   old_freq, CPUFREQ_RELATION_H,
 					   &priv_index)) {
 		ret = -EINVAL;
 		goto exit;
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ static int s5pv210_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index)
 	arm_volt = dvs_conf[index].arm_volt;
 	int_volt = dvs_conf[index].int_volt;
 
-	if (freqs.new > freqs.old) {
+	if (new_freq > old_freq) {
 		ret = regulator_set_voltage(arm_regulator,
 				arm_volt, arm_volt_max);
 		if (ret)
@@ -219,8 +219,6 @@ static int s5pv210_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index)
 			goto exit;
 	}
 
-	cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE);
-
 	/* Check if there need to change PLL */
 	if ((index == L0) || (priv_index == L0))
 		pll_changing = 1;
@@ -431,9 +429,7 @@ static int s5pv210_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index)
 		}
 	}
 
-	cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE);
-
-	if (freqs.new < freqs.old) {
+	if (new_freq < old_freq) {
 		regulator_set_voltage(int_regulator,
 				int_volt, int_volt_max);
 
-- 
1.7.12.rc2.18.g61b472e

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/