[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6c61572d-ef7a-ca0a-2253-7a3c0736f0a5@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:43:33 +0100
From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] memory: samsung: exynos5422-dmc: remove unused
exynos5_dmc members
Hi Krzysztof,
On 8/22/20 5:32 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> The struct exynos5_dmc members bypass_rate, mx_mspll_ccore_phy,
> mout_mx_mspll_ccore_phy and opp_bypass are not actually used.
>
> Apparently there was a plan to store the OPP for the bypass mode in
> opp_bypass member, but drivers fails to do it and instead always sets
> target voltage during bypass mode.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
> ---
> drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c | 9 ---------
> 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c b/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c
> index 31864ce59b25..df02afa8aa90 100644
> --- a/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c
> +++ b/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c
> @@ -123,9 +123,7 @@ struct exynos5_dmc {
> struct mutex lock;
> unsigned long curr_rate;
> unsigned long curr_volt;
> - unsigned long bypass_rate;
> struct dmc_opp_table *opp;
> - struct dmc_opp_table opp_bypass;
> int opp_count;
> u32 timings_arr_size;
> u32 *timing_row;
> @@ -143,8 +141,6 @@ struct exynos5_dmc {
> struct clk *mout_bpll;
> struct clk *mout_mclk_cdrex;
> struct clk *mout_mx_mspll_ccore;
> - struct clk *mx_mspll_ccore_phy;
> - struct clk *mout_mx_mspll_ccore_phy;
> struct devfreq_event_dev **counter;
> int num_counters;
> u64 last_overflow_ts[2];
> @@ -455,9 +451,6 @@ static int exynos5_dmc_align_bypass_voltage(struct exynos5_dmc *dmc,
> unsigned long target_volt)
> {
> int ret = 0;
> - unsigned long bypass_volt = dmc->opp_bypass.volt_uv;
> -
> - target_volt = max(bypass_volt, target_volt);
Could you explain which use cases you considered when you decided to
remove these lines?
Regards,
Lukasz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists