On 12/5/2018 4:44 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Rajendra Nayak (2018-12-03 21:21:15)
@@ -221,6 +224,47 @@ static int rpmpd_power_off(struct generic_pm_domain *domain)
return ret;
}
+static int rpmpd_set_performance(struct generic_pm_domain *domain,
+ unsigned int state)
+{
+ int ret = 0;
+ struct rpmpd *pd = domain_to_rpmpd(domain);
+
+ mutex_lock(&rpmpd_lock);
+
+ if (state > MAX_RPMPD_STATE)
+ goto out;
Does this need to be under the mutex lock? Doesn't look like it.
Nope, will move it out.
+
+ pd->corner = state;
+
+ if (!pd->enabled && (pd->key != KEY_FLOOR_CORNER))
Please drop useless parenthesis.
sure
+ goto out;
+
+ ret = rpmpd_aggregate_corner(pd);
+
+out:
+ mutex_unlock(&rpmpd_lock);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static unsigned int rpmpd_get_performance(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd,
+ struct dev_pm_opp *opp)
+{
+ struct device_node *np;
+ unsigned int corner = 0;
+
+ np = dev_pm_opp_get_of_node(opp);
+ if (of_property_read_u32(np, "qcom,level", &corner)) {
+ pr_err("%s: missing 'qcom,level' property\n", __func__);
We leak np reference here, assuming dev_pm_opp_get_of_node() returns an
of_node_get() pointer to the caller.
good catch, will fix.
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ of_node_put(np);
This same code exists twice. Perhaps a helper needs to exist for
qcom_rpm_get_performance() to pull the number out of the DT.
Sure I can make both drivers use a common helper instead of duplicating it.
+
+ return corner;
+}
