diff mbox

[v6,2/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Move cpufreq and cpuidle device registration to init_machine

Message ID 1404705056-11965-3-git-send-email-pankaj.dubey@samsung.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Pankaj Dubey July 7, 2014, 3:50 a.m. UTC
As exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function have just one lines
of code for registering platform devices. We can move these lines to
exynos_dt_machine_init and delete exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init
function. This will help in reducing lines of code in exynos.c, making it
more cleaner.

Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com>
---
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c |   20 ++++----------------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

Comments

Kim Kukjin July 7, 2014, 10:56 p.m. UTC | #1
On 07/07/14 12:50, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> As exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function have just one lines
> of code for registering platform devices. We can move these lines to
> exynos_dt_machine_init and delete exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init
> function. This will help in reducing lines of code in exynos.c, making it
> more cleaner.
>
> Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com>
> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey<pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
> Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c |   20 ++++----------------
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> index ff60b4c..47170eb 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> @@ -171,19 +171,6 @@ static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle = {
>   	.id                = -1,
>   };
>
> -void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void)
> -{
> -	if (soc_is_exynos5440())
> -		return;
> -
> -	platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
> -}
> -
> -void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void)
> -{
> -	platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
> -}
> -
>   void __iomem *sysram_base_addr;
>   void __iomem *sysram_ns_base_addr;
>
> @@ -300,10 +287,11 @@ static void __init exynos_dt_machine_init(void)
>   	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP))
>   		exynos_sysram_init();
>
> -	if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420"))
> -		exynos_cpuidle_init();
> +	if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420") ||
> +			!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440"))
> +		platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
>
> -	exynos_cpufreq_init();
> +	platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
>
>   	of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL);
>   }

This cannot be applied in my tree now....

- Kukjin
Pankaj Dubey July 8, 2014, 7:35 a.m. UTC | #2
Hi Kukjin,

> 
> On 07/07/14 12:50, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> > As exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function have just one
> > lines of code for registering platform devices. We can move these
> > lines to exynos_dt_machine_init and delete exynos_cpuidle_init and
> > exynos_cpufreq_init function. This will help in reducing lines of code
> > in exynos.c, making it more cleaner.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey<pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com>
> > ---
> >   arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c |   20 ++++----------------
> >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c index ff60b4c..47170eb 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > @@ -171,19 +171,6 @@ static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle = {
> >   	.id                = -1,
> >   };
> >
> > -void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void) -{
> > -	if (soc_is_exynos5440())
> > -		return;
> > -
> > -	platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
> > -}
> > -
> > -void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void) -{
> > -	platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
> > -}
> > -
> >   void __iomem *sysram_base_addr;
> >   void __iomem *sysram_ns_base_addr;
> >
> > @@ -300,10 +287,11 @@ static void __init exynos_dt_machine_init(void)
> >   	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP))
> >   		exynos_sysram_init();
> >
> > -	if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420"))
> > -		exynos_cpuidle_init();
> > +	if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420") ||
> > +			!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440"))
> > +		platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
> >
> > -	exynos_cpufreq_init();
> > +	platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
> >
> >   	of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL);
> >   }
> 
> This cannot be applied in my tree now....
> 

May I know what the issue is? As I am able to rebase this patch on today's
kgene/for-next
and could not see any merge conflict. 
If you think I need to respin this patch please let me know.

Thanks,
Pankaj Dubey

> - Kukjin
Kim Kukjin July 10, 2014, 1:33 p.m. UTC | #3
Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> 
> Hi Kukjin,
> 
Hi,

> >
> > On 07/07/14 12:50, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> > > As exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function have just one
> > > lines of code for registering platform devices. We can move these
> > > lines to exynos_dt_machine_init and delete exynos_cpuidle_init and
> > > exynos_cpufreq_init function. This will help in reducing lines of code
> > > in exynos.c, making it more cleaner.
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey<pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com>
> > > ---
> > >   arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c |   20 ++++----------------
> > >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > > b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c index ff60b4c..47170eb 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > > @@ -171,19 +171,6 @@ static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle = {
> > >   	.id                = -1,
> > >   };
> > >
> > > -void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void) -{
> > > -	if (soc_is_exynos5440())
> > > -		return;
> > > -
> > > -	platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
> > > -}
> > > -
> > > -void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void) -{
> > > -	platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
> > > -}
> > > -
> > >   void __iomem *sysram_base_addr;
> > >   void __iomem *sysram_ns_base_addr;
> > >
> > > @@ -300,10 +287,11 @@ static void __init exynos_dt_machine_init(void)
> > >   	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP))
> > >   		exynos_sysram_init();
> > >
> > > -	if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420"))
> > > -		exynos_cpuidle_init();
> > > +	if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420") ||
> > > +			!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440"))
> > > +		platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
> > >
> > > -	exynos_cpufreq_init();
> > > +	platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
> > >
> > >   	of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL);
> > >   }
> >
> > This cannot be applied in my tree now....
> >
> 
> May I know what the issue is? As I am able to rebase this patch on today's
> kgene/for-next
> and could not see any merge conflict.
> If you think I need to respin this patch please let me know.
> 

Pankaj, I found this is based on cpuidle related branch in my tree, BTW this
has a dependency with following so please respin your patch once I take the
patch in my tree maybe tonight.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/24/286

Thanks,
Kukjin
Pankaj Dubey July 14, 2014, 4:10 a.m. UTC | #4
Hi Kukjin,

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 7:04 PM, Kukjin wrote:
> Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> >
> > Hi Kukjin,
> >
> Hi,
> 
> > >
> > > On 07/07/14 12:50, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> > > > As exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function have just
> > > > one lines of code for registering platform devices. We can move
> > > > these lines to exynos_dt_machine_init and delete
> > > > exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function. This will
> > > > help in reducing lines of code in exynos.c, making it more cleaner.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey<pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >   arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c |   20 ++++----------------
> > > >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > > > b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c index ff60b4c..47170eb 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > > > @@ -171,19 +171,6 @@ static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle =
{
> > > >   	.id                = -1,
> > > >   };
> > > >
> > > > -void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void) -{
> > > > -	if (soc_is_exynos5440())
> > > > -		return;
> > > > -
> > > > -	platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
> > > > -}
> > > > -
> > > > -void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void) -{
> > > > -	platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL,
0);
> > > > -}
> > > > -
> > > >   void __iomem *sysram_base_addr;
> > > >   void __iomem *sysram_ns_base_addr;
> > > >
> > > > @@ -300,10 +287,11 @@ static void __init
exynos_dt_machine_init(void)
> > > >   	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP))
> > > >   		exynos_sysram_init();
> > > >
> > > > -	if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420"))
> > > > -		exynos_cpuidle_init();
> > > > +	if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420") ||
> > > > +
!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440"))
> > > > +		platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
> > > >
> > > > -	exynos_cpufreq_init();
> > > > +	platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL,
0);
> > > >
> > > >   	of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL,
> NULL);
> > > >   }
> > >
> > > This cannot be applied in my tree now....
> > >
> >
> > May I know what the issue is? As I am able to rebase this patch on
> > today's kgene/for-next and could not see any merge conflict.
> > If you think I need to respin this patch please let me know.
> >
> 
> Pankaj, I found this is based on cpuidle related branch in my tree, BTW
this
> has a dependency with following so please respin your patch once I take
the
> patch in my tree maybe tonight.
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/24/286
> 

Thanks. I have respinned this after resolving merge conflict. 


Thanks,
Pankaj Dubey

> Thanks,
> Kukjin
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
index ff60b4c..47170eb 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
@@ -171,19 +171,6 @@  static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle = {
 	.id                = -1,
 };
 
-void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void)
-{
-	if (soc_is_exynos5440())
-		return;
-
-	platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
-}
-
-void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void)
-{
-	platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
-}
-
 void __iomem *sysram_base_addr;
 void __iomem *sysram_ns_base_addr;
 
@@ -300,10 +287,11 @@  static void __init exynos_dt_machine_init(void)
 	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP))
 		exynos_sysram_init();
 
-	if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420"))
-		exynos_cpuidle_init();
+	if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420") ||
+			!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440"))
+		platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
 
-	exynos_cpufreq_init();
+	platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
 
 	of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL);
 }