linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] cpufreq: qcom: Read voltage LUT and populate OPP

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:   Thu, 17 Jan 2019 12:57:16 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Taniya Das <tdas@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, amit.kucheria@...aro.org,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>, evgreen@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] cpufreq: qcom: Read voltage LUT and populate OPP

On 17-01-19, 12:38, Taniya Das wrote:
> @@ -159,10 +170,18 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  	struct device *dev = &global_pdev->dev;
>  	struct of_phandle_args args;
>  	struct device_node *cpu_np;
> +	struct device *cpu_dev;
>  	struct resource *res;
>  	void __iomem *base;
>  	int ret, index;
> 
> +	cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(policy->cpu);
> +	if (!cpu_dev) {
> +		pr_err("%s: failed to get cpu%d device\n", __func__,
> +		       policy->cpu);
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}
> +
>  	cpu_np = of_cpu_device_node_get(policy->cpu);
>  	if (!cpu_np)
>  		return -EINVAL;
> @@ -199,12 +218,18 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> 
>  	policy->driver_data = base + REG_PERF_STATE;
> 
> -	ret = qcom_cpufreq_hw_read_lut(dev, policy, base);
> +	ret = qcom_cpufreq_hw_read_lut(policy, base);

I asked you to pass cpu_dev here instead of dev and you said okay in
the previous version of the patch. Didn't like it ?

-- 
viresh