linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] PM / Domains: Extract code to power off/on a PM domain

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:	Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:25:51 +0100
From:	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PM / Domains: Extract code to power off/on a PM domain

On 23 October 2014 14:12, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be> wrote:
> PM domains are powered on/off from various places. Some callers do
> latency measurements, others don't. Consolidate using two helper
> functions, which always measure the latencies, and update the stored
> latencies when needed.
>
> Other minor changes:
>   - Use pr_warn() instead of pr_warning(),
>   - There's no need to check genpd->name, %s handles NULL pointers fine,
>   - Make the warning format strings identical, to save memory.
>
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>

Reviewed-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>

Though, some minor thoughts below.

> ---
>  drivers/base/power/domain.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>  1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/domain.c b/drivers/base/power/domain.c
> index 28d6e8bf746c4683..7b2007be51188ff8 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/power/domain.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/domain.c
> @@ -151,6 +151,59 @@ static void genpd_recalc_cpu_exit_latency(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd)
>         genpd->cpuidle_data->idle_state->exit_latency = usecs64;
>  }
>
> +static int do_genpd_power_on(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd)

Should we try to agree on the prefixes of the function names in genpd?
Currently there are a mix of them.

May I suggest we try to stick to this:

Exported functions:
pm_genpd_*
_pm_genpd_*
__pm_genpd_*

Static functions:
genpd_*
_genpd_*
__genpd_*

What do you think? Do you have any better suggestions?

Kind regards
Uffe
--
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/