On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 10:53:06AM -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote: > Mark Brown had written, on 09/17/2010 10:36 AM, the following: > >It might be clearer to use some term other than enabled in the code - > >when reading I wasn't immediately sure if enabled meant that it was > >available to be selected or if it was the active operating point. How > >about 'allowed' (though I'm not 100% happy with that)? > ;).. The opp is enabled or disabled if it is populated, it is > implicit as being available but not enabled- how about active? this > would change the opp_enable/disable functions to opp_activate, > opp_deactivate.. > Recommendations folks? The enable/disable thing wasn't so noticable in the API itself, it was in the data structures that I found it confusing - the core has a different idea about what's going on with the system as a whole compared to the decision that an individual device is taking. > >When reading the description I'd expected to see some facility to > >trigger selection of an active operating point in the library (possibly > >as a separate call since you might have a bunch of operating points > >being updated in quick succession) but it looks like that needs to be > >supplied externally at the minute? > The intent is we use the opp_search* functions to pick up the opp > and enable/activate it and disable/deactivate it. Sure, I get that bit. What I meant was that I was expecting something that would say that changes had been made to the enabled/disabled sets and that it'd be a good idea to rescan, especially for cases where the devices change their requirements but the OPPs need to be done over a larger block. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
