linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] cpufreq: Move the IS_ENABLED(CPU

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, 27 Jun 2019 23:31:08 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:CPU FREQUENCY SCALING FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] cpufreq: Move the IS_ENABLED(CPU_THERMAL) macro in
 a stub

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:02 PM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezcano@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> The cpufreq_online and the cpufreq_offline [un]register the driver as
> a cooling device. This is done if the driver is flagged as a cooling
> device in addition with a IS_ENABLED macro to compile out the branching
> code.
>
> Group this test in a stub function added in the cpufreq header instead
> of having the IS_ENABLED in the code path.
>
> Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>

This one has been queued up for 5.3 already, no need to resend.

Thanks!

> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 6 ++----
>  include/linux/cpufreq.h   | 6 ++++++
>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 85ff958e01f1..aee024e42618 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1378,8 +1378,7 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
>         if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
>                 cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
>
> -       if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> -           cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV)
> +       if (cpufreq_thermal_control_enabled(cpufreq_driver))
>                 policy->cdev = of_cpufreq_cooling_register(policy);
>
>         pr_debug("initialization complete\n");
> @@ -1469,8 +1468,7 @@ static int cpufreq_offline(unsigned int cpu)
>                 goto unlock;
>         }
>
> -       if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> -           cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV) {
> +       if (cpufreq_thermal_control_enabled(cpufreq_driver)) {
>                 cpufreq_cooling_unregister(policy->cdev);
>                 policy->cdev = NULL;
>         }
> diff --git a/include/linux/cpufreq.h b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> index d01a74fbc4db..a1467aa7f58b 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> @@ -409,6 +409,12 @@ int cpufreq_unregister_driver(struct cpufreq_driver *driver_data);
>  const char *cpufreq_get_current_driver(void);
>  void *cpufreq_get_driver_data(void);
>
> +static inline int cpufreq_thermal_control_enabled(struct cpufreq_driver *drv)
> +{
> +       return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_THERMAL) &&
> +               (drv->flags & CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV);
> +}
> +
>  static inline void cpufreq_verify_within_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>                 unsigned int min, unsigned int max)
>  {
> --
> 2.17.1
>