Rafael J. Wysocki had written, on 09/17/2010 05:22 PM, the following:
On Friday, September 17, 2010, Nishanth Menon wrote:
Mark Brown had written, on 09/17/2010 10:36 AM, the following:
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 08:29:33PM -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:
+struct opp_def {
+ unsigned long freq;
+ unsigned long u_volt;
+
+ bool enabled;
+};
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..
Would that mean that "active" is the one currently in use?
I like the idea Phil pointed out[1] on using "available" instead..
opp_enable and disable will make the OPP available or not. does this
sound better?
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=128474217132058&w=2
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
--
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
