linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: governors: remove redundant code

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]

Message-ID: <CAKohpo=Nv6DfXqyv=v-1Eo=pvx25qyrQ2qs+pGqJvbJu2bwWaw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 25 Oct 2012 08:59:11 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org, patches@...aro.org,
	pdsw-power-team@....com, arvind.chauhan@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: governors: remove redundant code

On 25 October 2012 02:42, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 of October 2012 21:43:46 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Wednesday 24 of October 2012 11:37:13 Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> > On 22 October 2012 14:16, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
>> > > On 20 October 2012 01:42, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
>> > >> Initially ondemand governor was written and then using its code conservative
>> > >> governor is written. It used a lot of code from ondemand governor, but copy of
>> > >> code was created instead of using the same routines from both governors. Which
>> > >> increased code redundancy, which is difficult to manage.
>> > >>
>> > >> This patch is an attempt to move common part of both the governors to
>> > >> cpufreq_governor.c file to come over above mentioned issues.
>> > >>
>> > >> This shouldn't change anything from functionality point of view.
>> > >>
>> > >> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
>> >
>> > For everybody else, this patch is already pushed by Rafael in his linux-next
>> > branch.
>>
>> Well, not yet, although I'm going to do that.
>
> Or I would if it still applied.  Unfortunately, though, it doesn't apply any
> more to my linux-next branch due to some previous changes in it.
>
> Care to rebase?

Ahh.. I got confused by the following patch:

commit 83a73f712f2275033b2dc7f5c664988a1823ebc7
Author: viresh kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Date:   Tue Oct 23 01:28:05 2012 +0200

    cpufreq: Move common part from governors to separate file, v2

    Multiple cpufreq governers have defined similar get_cpu_idle_time_***()
    routines. These routines must be moved to some common place, so that all
    governors can use them.

    So moving them to cpufreq_governor.c, which seems to be a better place for
    keeping these routines.

    Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>


Actually, i should i have replied on this patch (and i forgot). I
wanted you to skip
this patch, as the latest patch already had this change.

But now i see commits from others on cpufreq_governor.c file.

Hmm... So you can keep your tree as it is and apply the attached
patch. It is the
same patch getting discussed in this thread. Just rebased over your latest next.

You must also apply my other patches fixing sparse warnings (they can be applied
over this patch, tested), to fix sparse warnings from cpufreq.

--
viresh

Download attachment "0001-cpufreq-governors-remove-redundant-code.patch" of type "application/octet-stream" (67140 bytes)