On 23/07/14 10:09, Thierry Reding wrote: > * PGP Signed by an unknown key > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 06:39:00PM +0300, Tuomas Tynkkynen wrote: > [...] >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c > [...] >> +static int tegra124_cpu_switch_to_dfll(void) >> +{ >> + struct clk *original_cpu_clk_parent; > > Maybe just "parent"? > >> + unsigned long rate; >> + struct dev_pm_opp *opp; >> + int ret; >> + >> + rate = clk_get_rate(cpu_clk); >> + opp = dev_pm_opp_find_freq_ceil(cpu_dev, &rate); >> + if (IS_ERR(opp)) >> + return PTR_ERR(opp); >> + >> + ret = clk_set_rate(dfll_clk, rate); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + >> + original_cpu_clk_parent = clk_get_parent(cpu_clk); >> + clk_set_parent(cpu_clk, pllp_clk); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + >> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(dfll_clk); >> + if (ret) >> + goto out_switch_to_original_parent; > > This could simply be "out" or "err" or anything else shorter than the > above. > >> + >> + clk_set_parent(cpu_clk, dfll_clk); >> + >> + return 0; >> + >> +out_switch_to_original_parent: >> + clk_set_parent(cpu_clk, original_cpu_clk_parent); >> + >> + return ret; >> +} >> + >> +static struct platform_device_info cpufreq_cpu0_devinfo = { >> + .name = "cpufreq-cpu0", >> +}; >> + >> +static int tegra124_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + int ret; >> + >> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(0); >> + if (!cpu_dev) >> + return -ENODEV; >> + >> + cpu_clk = of_clk_get_by_name(cpu_dev->of_node, "cpu_g"); >> + if (IS_ERR(cpu_clk)) >> + return PTR_ERR(cpu_clk); >> + >> + dfll_clk = of_clk_get_by_name(cpu_dev->of_node, "dfll"); >> + if (IS_ERR(dfll_clk)) { >> + ret = PTR_ERR(dfll_clk); >> + goto out_put_cpu_clk; >> + } >> + >> + pllx_clk = of_clk_get_by_name(cpu_dev->of_node, "pll_x"); >> + if (IS_ERR(pllx_clk)) { >> + ret = PTR_ERR(pllx_clk); >> + goto out_put_dfll_clk; >> + } >> + >> + pllp_clk = of_clk_get_by_name(cpu_dev->of_node, "pll_p"); >> + if (IS_ERR(pllp_clk)) { >> + ret = PTR_ERR(pllp_clk); >> + goto out_put_pllx_clk; >> + } > > Can the above not be devm_clk_get(cpu_dev, "...") so that you can remove > all the clk_put() calls in the cleanup code below? That would allocate the clks under the cpu_dev's devres list, i.e. all the clk_puts wouldn't happen when the cpufreq driver goes away, but only when cpu_dev itself goes away. > >> + >> + ret = dev_pm_opp_init_cpufreq_table(cpu_dev, &freq_table); >> + if (ret) >> + goto out_put_pllp_clk; >> + >> + ret = tegra124_cpu_switch_to_dfll(); >> + if (ret) >> + goto out_free_table; >> + >> + platform_device_register_full(&cpufreq_cpu0_devinfo); > > Should the cpufreq_cpu0_devinfo device perhaps be a child of pdev? Yeah, I suppose it should. >> + >> + return 0; >> + >> +out_free_table: >> + dev_pm_opp_free_cpufreq_table(cpu_dev, &freq_table); >> +out_put_pllp_clk: >> + clk_put(pllp_clk); >> +out_put_pllx_clk: >> + clk_put(pllx_clk); >> +out_put_dfll_clk: >> + clk_put(dfll_clk); >> +out_put_cpu_clk: >> + clk_put(cpu_clk); >> + >> + return ret; >> +} >> + >> +static struct platform_driver tegra124_cpufreq_platdrv = { >> + .driver = { >> + .name = "cpufreq-tegra124", >> + .owner = THIS_MODULE, >> + }, >> + .probe = tegra124_cpufreq_probe, > > Note that simply leaving out .remove() here doesn't guarantee that the > driver won't be unloaded. Also building it into the kernel doesn't > prevent that. You can still unbind the driver via sysfs. So you'd need > to add a .suppress_bind_attrs = true above. I hadn't heard about suppress_bind_attrs before, it indeed sounds useful. > But is there even a reason why we need that? Couldn't we make the > driver's .remove() undo what .probe() did so that the driver can be > unloaded? I guess that could be done, though to fully undo everything the regulator voltage would also need to be saved/restored. > Otherwise it probably makes more sense not to use a driver (and dummy > device) at all as Viresh already mentioned. > The dummy platform device is only required for probe deferral, if that could be solved in a different way then yes. >> +}; >> + >> +static const struct of_device_id soc_of_matches[] = { >> + { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra124", }, >> + {} >> +}; >> + >> +static int __init tegra_cpufreq_init(void) >> +{ >> + int ret; >> + struct platform_device *pdev; >> + >> + if (!of_find_matching_node(NULL, soc_of_matches)) >> + return -ENODEV; > > I think this could be of_machine_is_compatible() since there's only a > single entry in the match table. If there's a good chance that we may > end up with more entries, perhaps now would be a good time to add an > of_match_machine() function? I think this driver should work on Tegra132 without modifications. of_match_machine() does sound useful for some of the other cpufreq drivers as well and likely for your soc_is_tegra() from the PMC series as well. > >> + >> + ret = platform_driver_register(&tegra124_cpufreq_platdrv); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + >> + pdev = platform_device_register_simple("cpufreq-tegra124", -1, NULL, 0); >> + if (IS_ERR(pdev)) { >> + platform_driver_unregister(&tegra124_cpufreq_platdrv); >> + return PTR_ERR(pdev); >> + } >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Tuomas Tynkkynen <ttynkkynen@xxxxxxxxxx>"); >> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("cpufreq driver for nVIDIA Tegra124"); > > We use "NVIDIA" everywhere nowadays. > >> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPLv2"); > > The correct license string is "GPL v2". > >> +module_init(tegra_cpufreq_init); > > The placement of this is unusual. It should go immediately below the > tegra_cpufreq_init() function. > Ok. Thanks, Tuomas -- nvpublic -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html