| Message ID | 1404705056-11965-3-git-send-email-pankaj.dubey@samsung.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 07/07/14 12:50, Pankaj Dubey wrote: > As exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function have just one lines > of code for registering platform devices. We can move these lines to > exynos_dt_machine_init and delete exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init > function. This will help in reducing lines of code in exynos.c, making it > more cleaner. > > Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com> > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey<pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com> > --- > arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c | 20 ++++---------------- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > index ff60b4c..47170eb 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > @@ -171,19 +171,6 @@ static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle = { > .id = -1, > }; > > -void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void) > -{ > - if (soc_is_exynos5440()) > - return; > - > - platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle); > -} > - > -void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void) > -{ > - platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0); > -} > - > void __iomem *sysram_base_addr; > void __iomem *sysram_ns_base_addr; > > @@ -300,10 +287,11 @@ static void __init exynos_dt_machine_init(void) > if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP)) > exynos_sysram_init(); > > - if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420")) > - exynos_cpuidle_init(); > + if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420") || > + !of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440")) > + platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle); > > - exynos_cpufreq_init(); > + platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0); > > of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL); > } This cannot be applied in my tree now.... - Kukjin
Hi Kukjin, > > On 07/07/14 12:50, Pankaj Dubey wrote: > > As exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function have just one > > lines of code for registering platform devices. We can move these > > lines to exynos_dt_machine_init and delete exynos_cpuidle_init and > > exynos_cpufreq_init function. This will help in reducing lines of code > > in exynos.c, making it more cleaner. > > > > Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com> > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey<pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> > > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com> > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c | 20 ++++---------------- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > > b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c index ff60b4c..47170eb 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > > @@ -171,19 +171,6 @@ static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle = { > > .id = -1, > > }; > > > > -void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void) -{ > > - if (soc_is_exynos5440()) > > - return; > > - > > - platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle); > > -} > > - > > -void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void) -{ > > - platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0); > > -} > > - > > void __iomem *sysram_base_addr; > > void __iomem *sysram_ns_base_addr; > > > > @@ -300,10 +287,11 @@ static void __init exynos_dt_machine_init(void) > > if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP)) > > exynos_sysram_init(); > > > > - if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420")) > > - exynos_cpuidle_init(); > > + if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420") || > > + !of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440")) > > + platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle); > > > > - exynos_cpufreq_init(); > > + platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0); > > > > of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL); > > } > > This cannot be applied in my tree now.... > May I know what the issue is? As I am able to rebase this patch on today's kgene/for-next and could not see any merge conflict. If you think I need to respin this patch please let me know. Thanks, Pankaj Dubey > - Kukjin
Pankaj Dubey wrote: > > Hi Kukjin, > Hi, > > > > On 07/07/14 12:50, Pankaj Dubey wrote: > > > As exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function have just one > > > lines of code for registering platform devices. We can move these > > > lines to exynos_dt_machine_init and delete exynos_cpuidle_init and > > > exynos_cpufreq_init function. This will help in reducing lines of code > > > in exynos.c, making it more cleaner. > > > > > > Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey<pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> > > > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com> > > > --- > > > arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c | 20 ++++---------------- > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > > > b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c index ff60b4c..47170eb 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > > > @@ -171,19 +171,6 @@ static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle = { > > > .id = -1, > > > }; > > > > > > -void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void) -{ > > > - if (soc_is_exynos5440()) > > > - return; > > > - > > > - platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle); > > > -} > > > - > > > -void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void) -{ > > > - platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0); > > > -} > > > - > > > void __iomem *sysram_base_addr; > > > void __iomem *sysram_ns_base_addr; > > > > > > @@ -300,10 +287,11 @@ static void __init exynos_dt_machine_init(void) > > > if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP)) > > > exynos_sysram_init(); > > > > > > - if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420")) > > > - exynos_cpuidle_init(); > > > + if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420") || > > > + !of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440")) > > > + platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle); > > > > > > - exynos_cpufreq_init(); > > > + platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0); > > > > > > of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL); > > > } > > > > This cannot be applied in my tree now.... > > > > May I know what the issue is? As I am able to rebase this patch on today's > kgene/for-next > and could not see any merge conflict. > If you think I need to respin this patch please let me know. > Pankaj, I found this is based on cpuidle related branch in my tree, BTW this has a dependency with following so please respin your patch once I take the patch in my tree maybe tonight. https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/24/286 Thanks, Kukjin
Hi Kukjin, On Thursday, July 10, 2014 7:04 PM, Kukjin wrote: > Pankaj Dubey wrote: > > > > Hi Kukjin, > > > Hi, > > > > > > > On 07/07/14 12:50, Pankaj Dubey wrote: > > > > As exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function have just > > > > one lines of code for registering platform devices. We can move > > > > these lines to exynos_dt_machine_init and delete > > > > exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function. This will > > > > help in reducing lines of code in exynos.c, making it more cleaner. > > > > > > > > Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey<pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> > > > > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com> > > > > --- > > > > arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c | 20 ++++---------------- > > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > > > > b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c index ff60b4c..47170eb 100644 > > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c > > > > @@ -171,19 +171,6 @@ static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle = { > > > > .id = -1, > > > > }; > > > > > > > > -void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void) -{ > > > > - if (soc_is_exynos5440()) > > > > - return; > > > > - > > > > - platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle); > > > > -} > > > > - > > > > -void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void) -{ > > > > - platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0); > > > > -} > > > > - > > > > void __iomem *sysram_base_addr; > > > > void __iomem *sysram_ns_base_addr; > > > > > > > > @@ -300,10 +287,11 @@ static void __init exynos_dt_machine_init(void) > > > > if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP)) > > > > exynos_sysram_init(); > > > > > > > > - if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420")) > > > > - exynos_cpuidle_init(); > > > > + if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420") || > > > > + !of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440")) > > > > + platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle); > > > > > > > > - exynos_cpufreq_init(); > > > > + platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0); > > > > > > > > of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, > NULL); > > > > } > > > > > > This cannot be applied in my tree now.... > > > > > > > May I know what the issue is? As I am able to rebase this patch on > > today's kgene/for-next and could not see any merge conflict. > > If you think I need to respin this patch please let me know. > > > > Pankaj, I found this is based on cpuidle related branch in my tree, BTW this > has a dependency with following so please respin your patch once I take the > patch in my tree maybe tonight. > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/24/286 > Thanks. I have respinned this after resolving merge conflict. Thanks, Pankaj Dubey > Thanks, > Kukjin
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c index ff60b4c..47170eb 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c @@ -171,19 +171,6 @@ static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle = { .id = -1, }; -void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void) -{ - if (soc_is_exynos5440()) - return; - - platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle); -} - -void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void) -{ - platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0); -} - void __iomem *sysram_base_addr; void __iomem *sysram_ns_base_addr; @@ -300,10 +287,11 @@ static void __init exynos_dt_machine_init(void) if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP)) exynos_sysram_init(); - if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420")) - exynos_cpuidle_init(); + if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420") || + !of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440")) + platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle); - exynos_cpufreq_init(); + platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0); of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL); }