On 23 October 2014 14:12, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+rene...@glider.be> wrote: > PM domains are powered on/off from various places. Some callers do > latency measurements, others don't. Consolidate using two helper > functions, which always measure the latencies, and update the stored > latencies when needed. > > Other minor changes: > - Use pr_warn() instead of pr_warning(), > - There's no need to check genpd->name, %s handles NULL pointers fine, > - Make the warning format strings identical, to save memory. > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+rene...@glider.be>
Reviewed-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hans...@linaro.org> Though, some minor thoughts below. > --- > drivers/base/power/domain.c | 101 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------ > 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/base/power/domain.c b/drivers/base/power/domain.c > index 28d6e8bf746c4683..7b2007be51188ff8 100644 > --- a/drivers/base/power/domain.c > +++ b/drivers/base/power/domain.c > @@ -151,6 +151,59 @@ static void genpd_recalc_cpu_exit_latency(struct > generic_pm_domain *genpd) > genpd->cpuidle_data->idle_state->exit_latency = usecs64; > } > > +static int do_genpd_power_on(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd) Should we try to agree on the prefixes of the function names in genpd? Currently there are a mix of them. May I suggest we try to stick to this: Exported functions: pm_genpd_* _pm_genpd_* __pm_genpd_* Static functions: genpd_* _genpd_* __genpd_* What do you think? Do you have any better suggestions? Kind regards Uffe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/