[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161129010951.GU6095@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 17:09:51 -0800
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>, nm@...com,
Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>,
linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, robh@...nel.org,
d-gerlach@...com, broonie@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 07/10] PM / OPP: Separate out _generic_opp_set_rate()
On 11/24, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Later patches would add support for custom opp_set_rate callbacks. This
> patch separates out the code for generic opp_set_rate handler in order
> to prepare for that.
s/opp_set_rate/set_opp/ twice?
>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
> Tested-by: Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@...com>
> ---
Besides the naming confusion.
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
> @@ -1422,6 +1488,11 @@ int dev_pm_opp_set_regulators(struct device *dev, const char * const names[],
>
> opp_table->regulator_count = count;
>
> + /* Allocate block only once to pass to ->set_rate() */
_generic_set_opp()? Or just set_opp when that gets introduced in
the next patch.
> + ret = _allocate_set_opp_data(opp_table);
> + if (ret)
> + goto free_regulators;
> +
> mutex_unlock(&opp_table_lock);
> return 0;
>
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists