Hi,
On 2018년 11월 22일 03:01, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> The patch prepares devfreq device for handling suspend/resume functionality.
> The new fields will store needed information during this process.
> Devfreq framework handles opp-suspend DT entry and there is no need of
> modyfications in the drivers code.
>
> The patch draws on Tobias Jakobi's work posted ~2 years ago, who tried to
> solve issue with devfreq device's frequency during suspend/resume.
> During the discussion on LKML some corner cases and comments appeared
> related to the design. This patch address them keeping in mind suggestions
> from Chanwoo Choi.
You already explain the patch history on cover letter. It is enough.
Please remove the duplicate history description from all patches except for cover letter.
>
> Suggested-by: Tobias Jakobi <tjakobi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Suggested-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <l.luba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c | 3 +++
> include/linux/devfreq.h | 4 ++++
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c b/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c
> index 1414130..e20e7e4 100644
> --- a/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c
> @@ -657,6 +657,9 @@ struct devfreq *devfreq_add_device(struct device *dev,
> }
> devfreq->max_freq = devfreq->scaling_max_freq;
>
> + devfreq->suspend_freq = dev_pm_opp_get_suspend_opp_freq(dev);
> + atomic_set(&devfreq->suspend_count, 0);
> +
> dev_set_name(&devfreq->dev, "devfreq%d",
> atomic_inc_return(&devfreq_no));
> err = device_register(&devfreq->dev);
> diff --git a/include/linux/devfreq.h b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> index e4963b0..7fe96f9 100644
> --- a/include/linux/devfreq.h
> +++ b/include/linux/devfreq.h
> @@ -167,6 +167,10 @@ struct devfreq {
> unsigned long scaling_max_freq;
> bool stop_polling;
>
> + unsigned long suspend_freq;
> + unsigned long resume_freq;
> + atomic_t suspend_count;
> +
> /* information for device frequency transition */
> unsigned int total_trans;
> unsigned int *trans_table;
>
You don't need to make the separate patch for this. You can squash patch1
into patch3 because the newly added variables are used on patch3.
--
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
Samsung Electronics
