Re: [PATCH V5 1/4] cpufreq: exynos: Add cpufreq driver for exynos5440

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 28 March 2013 13:35, Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This patch adds dvfs support for exynos5440 SOC. This soc has 4 cores and
> they scale at same frequency. The nature of exynos5440 clock controller is
> different from previous exynos controllers so not using the common exynos
> cpufreq framework. The major difference being interrupt notification for
> frequency change. Also, OPP library is used for device tree parsing to get
> different parameters like frequency, voltage etc. Since the opp library sorts
> the frequency table in ascending order so they are again re-arranged in
> descending order. This will have one-to-one mapping with the clock controller
> state management logic.
>
> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Mostly okay now, just minor comments:

> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
> +static void exynos_cpufreq_work(struct work_struct *work)
> +{

> +       if (likely(index < dvfs_info->freq_count)) {
> +               freqs.new = freq_table[index].frequency;
> +               for_each_cpu(freqs.cpu, policy->cpus)
> +                       cpufreq_notify_transition(&freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE);
> +               dvfs_info->cur_frequency = freqs.new;
> +       } else {
> +               dev_crit(dvfs_info->dev, "New frequency out of range\n");
> +       }

I believe there is something wrong here. For failure cases too
we need to issue cpufreq_notify_transition(&freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE);
with the old frequency.

> +static int exynos_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{

> +       ret = cpufreq_register_driver(&exynos_driver);
> +       if (ret) {
> +               dev_err(dvfs_info->dev,
> +                       "%s: failed to register cpufreq driver\n", __func__);
> +               goto err_free_table;
> +       }
> +
> +       of_node_put(np);

Don't we need to put node everytime?

> +       dvfs_info->dvfs_enabled = true;
> +       return 0;
> +
> +err_free_table:
> +       opp_free_cpufreq_table(dvfs_info->dev, &dvfs_info->freq_table);
> +err_put_node:
> +       of_node_put(np);
> +       dev_err(dvfs_info->dev, "%s: failed initialization\n", __func__);
> +       return ret;
> +}

--
viresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux SoC Development]     [Linux Rockchip Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux