On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 05:06:42PM +0200, jean.pi...@newoldbits.com wrote: > From: Jean Pihet <j-pi...@ti.com> > > In preparation for the per-device constratins support: > - rename update_target to pm_qos_update_target > - generalize and export pm_qos_update_target for usage by the upcoming > per-device latency constraints framework: > . operate on struct pm_qos_constraints for constraints management, > . introduce an 'action' parameter for constraints add/update/remove, > . the return value indicates if the aggregated constraint value has > changed, > - update the internal code to operate on struct pm_qos_constraints > - add a NULL pointer check in the API functions > > Signed-off-by: Jean Pihet <j-pi...@ti.com> > > --- > include/linux/pm_qos.h | 14 ++++++ > kernel/power/qos.c | 123 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- > 2 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/pm_qos.h b/include/linux/pm_qos.h > index 9772311..84aa150 100644 > --- a/include/linux/pm_qos.h > +++ b/include/linux/pm_qos.h > @@ -44,7 +44,16 @@ struct pm_qos_constraints { > struct blocking_notifier_head *notifiers; > }; > > +/* Action requested to pm_qos_update_target */ > +enum pm_qos_req_action { > + PM_QOS_ADD_REQ, /* Add a new request */ > + PM_QOS_UPDATE_REQ, /* Update an existing request */ > + PM_QOS_REMOVE_REQ /* Remove an existing request */ > +}; > +
What do you need this enum for? The function names *_update_*, *_add_*, and *_remove_* seem to be pretty redundant if you have to pass an enum that could possibly conflict with the function name. > #ifdef CONFIG_PM > +int pm_qos_update_target(struct pm_qos_constraints *c, struct plist_node > *node, > + enum pm_qos_req_action action, int value); The action for update_target better damn well be "PM_QOS_UPDATE_REQ" or there is something strange going on.... BTW what shold this function do if the pm_qos_req_action was *not* the UPDATE one? pm_qos_update_target should be a static to the C- file along with the enum pm_qos_req_action. > void pm_qos_add_request(struct pm_qos_request *req, int pm_qos_class, > s32 value); > void pm_qos_update_request(struct pm_qos_request *req, > @@ -56,6 +65,11 @@ int pm_qos_add_notifier(int pm_qos_class, struct > notifier_block *notifier); > int pm_qos_remove_notifier(int pm_qos_class, struct notifier_block > *notifier); > int pm_qos_request_active(struct pm_qos_request *req); > #else > +static inline int pm_qos_update_target(struct pm_qos_constraints *c, > + struct plist_node *node, > + enum pm_qos_req_action action, > + int value) > + { return 0; } > static inline void pm_qos_add_request(struct pm_qos_request *req, > int pm_qos_class, s32 value) > { return; } > diff --git a/kernel/power/qos.c b/kernel/power/qos.c > index 66e8d6f..fc60f96 100644 > --- a/kernel/power/qos.c > +++ b/kernel/power/qos.c > @@ -121,17 +121,17 @@ static const struct file_operations pm_qos_power_fops = > { > }; > > /* unlocked internal variant */ > -static inline int pm_qos_get_value(struct pm_qos_object *o) > +static inline int pm_qos_get_value(struct pm_qos_constraints *c) > { > - if (plist_head_empty(&o->constraints->list)) > - return o->constraints->default_value; > + if (plist_head_empty(&c->list)) > + return c->default_value; > > - switch (o->constraints->type) { > + switch (c->type) { > case PM_QOS_MIN: > - return plist_first(&o->constraints->list)->prio; > + return plist_first(&c->list)->prio; > > case PM_QOS_MAX: > - return plist_last(&o->constraints->list)->prio; > + return plist_last(&c->list)->prio; > > default: > /* runtime check for not using enum */ > @@ -139,47 +139,73 @@ static inline int pm_qos_get_value(struct pm_qos_object > *o) > } > } > > -static inline s32 pm_qos_read_value(struct pm_qos_object *o) > +static inline s32 pm_qos_read_value(struct pm_qos_constraints *c) > { > - return o->constraints->target_value; > + return c->target_value; > } > > -static inline void pm_qos_set_value(struct pm_qos_object *o, s32 value) > +static inline void pm_qos_set_value(struct pm_qos_constraints *c, s32 value) > { > - o->constraints->target_value = value; > + c->target_value = value; > } > > -static void update_target(struct pm_qos_object *o, struct plist_node *node, > - int del, int value) > +/** > + * pm_qos_update_target - manages the constraints list and calls the > notifiers > + * if needed > + * @c: constraints data struct > + * @node: request to add to the list, to update or to remove > + * @action: action to take on the constraints list > + * @value: value of the request to add or update > + * > + * This function returns 1 if the aggregated constraint value has changed, 0 > + * otherwise. > + */ > +int pm_qos_update_target(struct pm_qos_constraints *c, struct plist_node > *node, > + enum pm_qos_req_action action, int value) > { > unsigned long flags; > - int prev_value, curr_value; > + int prev_value, curr_value, new_value; > > spin_lock_irqsave(&pm_qos_lock, flags); > - prev_value = pm_qos_get_value(o); > - /* PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE is a signal that the value is unchanged */ > - if (value != PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE) { > + prev_value = pm_qos_get_value(c); > + if (value == PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE) > + new_value = c->default_value; > + else > + new_value = value; > + > + switch (action) { > + case PM_QOS_REMOVE_REQ: We have a remove request API already. This overloading of this interface feels wrong to me. > + plist_del(node, &c->list); > + break; > + case PM_QOS_UPDATE_REQ: > /* > * to change the list, we atomically remove, reinit > * with new value and add, then see if the extremal > * changed > */ > - plist_del(node, &o->constraints->list); > - plist_node_init(node, value); > - plist_add(node, &o->constraints->list); > - } else if (del) { > - plist_del(node, &o->constraints->list); > - } else { > - plist_add(node, &o->constraints->list); > + plist_del(node, &c->list); > + case PM_QOS_ADD_REQ: Don't we have an API for adding a request? if you want to overload update like this then either we lose the add API or this shouldn't be here. > + plist_node_init(node, new_value); > + plist_add(node, &c->list); > + break; > + default: > + /* no action */ > + ; > } > - curr_value = pm_qos_get_value(o); > - pm_qos_set_value(o, curr_value); > + > + curr_value = pm_qos_get_value(c); > + pm_qos_set_value(c, curr_value); > + > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pm_qos_lock, flags); > > - if (prev_value != curr_value) > - blocking_notifier_call_chain(o->constraints->notifiers, > + if (prev_value != curr_value) { > + blocking_notifier_call_chain(c->notifiers, > (unsigned long)curr_value, > NULL); > + return 1; > + } else { > + return 0; > + } > } > > /** > @@ -190,7 +216,7 @@ static void update_target(struct pm_qos_object *o, struct > plist_node *node, > */ > int pm_qos_request(int pm_qos_class) > { > - return pm_qos_read_value(pm_qos_array[pm_qos_class]); > + return pm_qos_read_value(pm_qos_array[pm_qos_class]->constraints); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm_qos_request); > > @@ -216,20 +242,16 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm_qos_request_active); > void pm_qos_add_request(struct pm_qos_request *req, > int pm_qos_class, s32 value) > { > - struct pm_qos_object *o = pm_qos_array[pm_qos_class]; > - int new_value; > + if (!req) /*guard against callers passing in null */ > + return; > > if (pm_qos_request_active(req)) { > WARN(1, KERN_ERR "pm_qos_add_request() called for already added > request\n"); > return; > } > - if (value == PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE) > - new_value = o->constraints->default_value; > - else > - new_value = value; > - plist_node_init(&req->node, new_value); > req->pm_qos_class = pm_qos_class; > - update_target(o, &req->node, 0, PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE); > + pm_qos_update_target(pm_qos_array[pm_qos_class]->constraints, > + &req->node, PM_QOS_ADD_REQ, value); Ok, using pm_qos_update_target to reduce the LOC is ok but I don't think this function and the enum should be exported outside of pm_qos.c --mark > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm_qos_add_request); > > @@ -246,9 +268,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm_qos_add_request); > void pm_qos_update_request(struct pm_qos_request *req, > s32 new_value) > { > - s32 temp; > - struct pm_qos_object *o; > - > if (!req) /*guard against callers passing in null */ > return; > > @@ -257,15 +276,10 @@ void pm_qos_update_request(struct pm_qos_request *req, > return; > } > > - o = pm_qos_array[req->pm_qos_class]; > - > - if (new_value == PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE) > - temp = o->constraints->default_value; > - else > - temp = new_value; > - > - if (temp != req->node.prio) > - update_target(o, &req->node, 0, temp); > + if (new_value != req->node.prio) > + pm_qos_update_target( > + pm_qos_array[req->pm_qos_class]->constraints, > + &req->node, PM_QOS_UPDATE_REQ, new_value); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm_qos_update_request); > > @@ -279,9 +293,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm_qos_update_request); > */ > void pm_qos_remove_request(struct pm_qos_request *req) > { > - struct pm_qos_object *o; > - > - if (req == NULL) > + if (!req) /*guard against callers passing in null */ > return; > /* silent return to keep pcm code cleaner */ > > @@ -290,8 +302,9 @@ void pm_qos_remove_request(struct pm_qos_request *req) > return; > } > > - o = pm_qos_array[req->pm_qos_class]; > - update_target(o, &req->node, 1, PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE); > + pm_qos_update_target(pm_qos_array[req->pm_qos_class]->constraints, > + &req->node, PM_QOS_REMOVE_REQ, > + PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE); > memset(req, 0, sizeof(*req)); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm_qos_remove_request); > @@ -395,7 +408,6 @@ static ssize_t pm_qos_power_read(struct file *filp, char > __user *buf, > { > s32 value; > unsigned long flags; > - struct pm_qos_object *o; > struct pm_qos_request *req = filp->private_data; > > if (!req) > @@ -403,9 +415,8 @@ static ssize_t pm_qos_power_read(struct file *filp, char > __user *buf, > if (!pm_qos_request_active(req)) > return -EINVAL; > > - o = pm_qos_array[req->pm_qos_class]; > spin_lock_irqsave(&pm_qos_lock, flags); > - value = pm_qos_get_value(o); > + value = pm_qos_get_value(pm_qos_array[req->pm_qos_class]->constraints); > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pm_qos_lock, flags); > > return simple_read_from_buffer(buf, count, f_pos, &value, sizeof(s32)); > -- > 1.7.2.5 > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html