linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/10] cpufreq: dt: Identify cpu-sharing for platforms without operating-points-v2

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: <CAJZ5v0htz=F29BAkkGR3XPa1F15o0qg_pUbcPkqbY-COD8UDsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 25 Apr 2016 23:48:35 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>, andrew@...n.ch,
	gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com,
	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
	sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] cpufreq: dt: Identify cpu-sharing for platforms
 without operating-points-v2

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> On 04/25, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 22-04-16, 15:27, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> > On 04/21, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> > > @@ -167,14 +167,16 @@ static int cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>> > >   /* Get OPP-sharing information from "operating-points-v2" bindings */
>> > >   ret = dev_pm_opp_of_get_sharing_cpus(cpu_dev, policy->cpus);
> [..]
>> > > +         if (dev_pm_opp_get_sharing_cpus(cpu_dev, policy->cpus))
>> > > +                 fallback = true;
>> >
>> > I'm sort of lost, we make the same call twice here. Why would the
>> > return value change between the first time and the second?
>>
>> Two different APIs, which look similar :)
>>
>> The first one tries to find the sharing-cpus relation from DT, the
>> other one is for v1 bindings and finds it due to platform code
>> dev_pm_opp_set_sharing_cpus() call.
>
> Ah thanks. My eyes glossed over the "of" part. Sounds fine.

So that would be an "ACK", right?