Hi Daniel,
On 5/10/2012 2:14 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> This patch removes the ops usage because we have the index
> passed as parameter to the idle function and we can determine
> if we do WFI or memory retention.
>
> The benefit of this cleanup is the removal of:
> * the ops
> * the statedata usage because we want to get rid of it in all the drivers
> * extra structure definition
> * extra functions definition
> * pointless macro definition BIT(0)
This macro was not pointless in the original code. This comment seems to
suggest so.
>
> It also benefits the readability.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c | 81 +++++++++++++--------------------------
> 1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c
> index f0f179c..61f4e52 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c
> @@ -25,35 +25,46 @@
>
> #define DAVINCI_CPUIDLE_MAX_STATES 2
>
> -struct davinci_ops {
> - void (*enter) (u32 flags);
> - void (*exit) (u32 flags);
> - u32 flags;
> -};
> +static bool ddr2_pwdn = false;
This zero initialization is not required. In fact this throws a
checkpatch error.
> +
> +static void __iomem *ddr2_reg_base;
> +
> +static void davinci_save_ddr_power(int enter, bool pdown)
> +{
> + u32 val;
> +
> + val = __raw_readl(ddr2_reg_base + DDR2_SDRCR_OFFSET);
> +
> + if (enter) {
> + if (pdown)
> + val |= DDR2_SRPD_BIT;
> + else
> + val &= ~DDR2_SRPD_BIT;
> + val |= DDR2_LPMODEN_BIT;
> + } else {
> + val &= ~(DDR2_SRPD_BIT | DDR2_LPMODEN_BIT);
> + }
> +
> + __raw_writel(val, ddr2_reg_base + DDR2_SDRCR_OFFSET);
Can you please use readl/writel instead of the __raw variants. I know
this is carried from original code, but we need to git rid of it with
cleanups like this.
Thanks,
Sekhar
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
