[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7c21e0cc-d266-87db-b92d-663561924537@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 16:50:12 +0300
From: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>,
thierry.reding@...il.com, jonathanh@...dia.com,
daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org
Cc: ksitaraman@...dia.com, sanjayc@...dia.com,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/5] cpuidle: Add Tegra194 cpuidle driver
04.03.2021 09:08, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
...
> +static int __init tegra194_cpuidle_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct cpumask *cpumask;
> + int cpu, ret;
> +
> + if (!check_mce_version()) {
> + pr_err("cpuidle: incompatible MCE version, cannot register driver\n");
Should be dev_err() everywhere.
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> +
> + tsc_per_usec = arch_timer_get_cntfrq() / 1000000;
> +
> + cpumask = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, cpumask_size(), GFP_KERNEL);
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, cpumask);
cpumask_copy(..)?
> + t194_cpu_idle_driver.cpumask = cpumask;
Depending on 'online' mask instead of the 'present' mask looks odd. Is
this really intended to be so?
...
> +static int tegra194_cpuidle_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + unregister_pm_notifier(&suspend_notifier);
> + cpuhp_remove_state(hp_state);
> + cpuidle_unregister(&t194_cpu_idle_driver);
> + kfree(t194_cpu_idle_driver.cpumask);
kfree() of a managed resource.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists