linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] PM / OPP: add non-OF versions of dev_pm_opp_{cpumask_,}remove

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: <57288168.7060105@arm.com>
Date:	Tue, 3 May 2016 11:46:00 +0100
From:	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] PM / OPP: add non-OF versions of
 dev_pm_opp_{cpumask_,}remove_table



On 02/05/16 23:55, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 04/29/2016 03:37 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> Functions dev_pm_opp_of_{cpumask_,}remove_table removes/frees all the
>> static OPP entries associated with the device and/or all cpus(in case
>> of cpumask) that are created from DT.
>>
>> However the OPP entries are populated reading from the firmware or some
>> different method using dev_pm_opp_add are marked dynamic and can't be
>> removed using above functions.
>>
>> This patch adds non DT/OF versions of dev_pm_opp_{cpumask_,}remove_table
>> to support the above mentioned usecase.
>>
>> This is in preparation to make use of the same in scpi-cpufreq.c
>>
>> Cc: Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
>> CC: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
>> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
>> Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
>> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
>
> Could you rebase this on top of Arnd's patch[1] to fix the cpumask_var_t
> usage? Your patch introduces more incorrect use of that type.
>

Thanks for noticing that. I will rebase on top of that patch and repost it.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep