Hey Lukasz, On Monday 20 Jan 2020 at 14:52:07 (+0000), Lukasz Luba wrote: > On 1/17/20 10:54 AM, Quentin Perret wrote: > > Suggested alternative: have two registration functions like so: > > > > int em_register_dev_pd(struct device *dev, unsigned int nr_states, > > struct em_data_callback *cb); > > int em_register_cpu_pd(cpumask_t *span, unsigned int nr_states, > > struct em_data_callback *cb); > > Interesting, in the internal review Dietmar asked me to remove these two > functions. I had the same idea, which would simplify a bit the > registration and it does not need to check the dev->bus if it is CPU. > > Unfortunately, we would need also two function in drivers/opp/of.c: > dev_pm_opp_of_register_cpu_em(policy->cpus); > and > dev_pm_opp_of_register_dev_em(dev); > > Thus, I have created only one registration function, which you can see > in this patch set. Right, I can see how having a unified API would be appealing, but the OPP dependency is a nono, so we'll need to work around one way or another. FWIW, I don't think having separate APIs for CPUs and other devices is that bad given that we already have entirely different frameworks to drive their respective frequencies. And the _cpu variants are basically just wrappers around the _dev ones, so not too bad either IMO :). Thanks, Quentin _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
