[PATCH 211/228] cpufreq: tegra: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition()
From: Stephen Warren <hidden>
Date: 2013-09-13 22:52:31
Also in:
linux-pm, lkml
On 09/13/2013 07:02 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Most of the drivers do following in their ->target_index() routines: struct cpufreq_freqs freqs; freqs.old = old freq... freqs.new = new freq... cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE); /* Change rate here */ cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE); This is replicated over all cpufreq drivers today and there doesn't exists a good enough reason why this shouldn't be moved to cpufreq core instead. Earlier patches have added support in cpufreq core to do cpufreq notification on frequency change, this one removes it from this driver. Some related minor cleanups are also done along with it.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/tegra-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/tegra-cpufreq.c
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -121,21 +117,10 @@ static int tegra_update_cpu_speed(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, else clk_set_rate(emc_clk, 100000000); /* emc 50Mhz */ - cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE);
...
- cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE);
I wonder if this series is bisectable? Perhaps I should just go and read the rest of the series, but I presume there's a patch somewhere else that adds those two cpufreq_notify_transition() to the cpufreq core. Either that happens before this patch (in which case listeners will get two notifications each time; perhaps that is safe?), or after this patch (in which case with just this patch applied, no notifications will be sent until a later patch! Aside from that, all the Tegra-specific patches in this series, Acked-by: Stephen Warren <redacted>