On 11-04-17, 10:43, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:59:40AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > There is only one user of cpufreq_cooling_get_level() and that already
> > has pointer to the cpufreq_dev structure. It can directly call
> > get_level() instead and we can get rid of cpufreq_cooling_get_level().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 33 +--------------------------------
> > include/linux/cpu_cooling.h | 6 ------
> > 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 38 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > index e2931c20c309..99dc6833de75 100644
> > --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > @@ -137,37 +137,6 @@ static unsigned long get_level(struct
> > cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_dev,
> > }
> >
> > /**
> > - * cpufreq_cooling_get_level - for a given cpu, return the cooling level.
> > - * @cpu: cpu for which the level is required
> > - * @freq: the frequency of interest
> > - *
> > - * This function will match the cooling level corresponding to the
> > - * requested @freq and return it.
> > - *
> > - * Return: The matched cooling level on success or THERMAL_CSTATE_INVALID
> > - * otherwise.
> > - */
> > -unsigned long cpufreq_cooling_get_level(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int
> > freq)
> > -{
> > - struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_dev;
> > -
> > - mutex_lock(&cooling_list_lock);
> > - list_for_each_entry(cpufreq_dev, &cpufreq_dev_list, node) {
> > - if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &cpufreq_dev->allowed_cpus)) {
> > - unsigned long level = get_level(cpufreq_dev, freq);
> > -
> > - mutex_unlock(&cooling_list_lock);
> > - return level;
> > - }
> > - }
> > - mutex_unlock(&cooling_list_lock);
> > -
> > - pr_err("%s: cpu:%d not part of any cooling device\n", __func__, cpu);
> > - return THERMAL_CSTATE_INVALID;
> > -}
> > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpufreq_cooling_get_level);
> > -
> > -/**
> > * cpufreq_thermal_notifier - notifier callback for cpufreq policy change.
> > * @nb: struct notifier_block * with callback info.
> > * @event: value showing cpufreq event for which this function invoked.
> > @@ -698,7 +667,7 @@ static int cpufreq_power2state(struct
> > thermal_cooling_device *cdev,
> > normalised_power = (dyn_power * 100) / last_load;
> > target_freq = cpu_power_to_freq(cpufreq_dev, normalised_power);
> >
> > - *state = cpufreq_cooling_get_level(cpu, target_freq);
> > + *state = get_level(cpufreq_dev, target_freq);
>
> Did I miss something or we are loosing semantics here?
I just got rid of an unnecessary wrapper routine. That's it. There shouldn't be
any functional change after this patch.
> I guess the idea at this point is to get the level corresponding to the
> frequency on a specific cpu. Let's have a look on get_level()..
>
> I guess now we can rely on the freq table held in the
> cpufreq_cooling_device..
I am not sure I understood your concerns here :(
--
viresh
