Re: [PATCH 7/7] cpufreq: Separate CPU device removal from CPU online

From: Viresh Kumar
Date: Mon Jul 27 2015 - 11:07:11 EST


On 27-07-15, 16:09, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> To separate the CPU online interface from the CPU device removal
> one,

Why do you call this cpu device removal code?

> split cpufreq_online() out of cpufreq_add_dev() and make
> cpufreq_cpu_callback() call the former, while the latter will only
> be used as the CPU device removal subsystem interface callback.
>
> While at it, notice that the return value of sif->add_dev() is
> ignored in bus_probe_device(), so (the new) cpufreq_add_dev()
> doesn't need to bother with returning anything different from 0
> and cpufreq_online() may be a void function.

That is going to change in 4.3:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/26/132

>
> Moreover, since the return value of cpufreq_add_policy_cpu() is
> going to be ignored now too, make a void function of it as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> Suggested-by: Russell King <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 125 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
> 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1056,19 +1056,17 @@ static int cpufreq_init_policy(struct cp
> return cpufreq_set_policy(policy, &new_policy);
> }
>
> -static int cpufreq_add_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu)
> +static void cpufreq_add_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu)
> {
> - int ret = 0;
> -
> /* Has this CPU been taken care of already? */
> if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus))
> - return 0;
> + return;
>
> if (has_target()) {
> - ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP);
> + int ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP);

Why should we move the definition of ret here and ...

> if (ret) {
> pr_err("%s: Failed to stop governor\n", __func__);
> - return ret;
> + return;
> }
> }

--
viresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/