Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: governors: remove redundant code

[Viresh Kumar]

On 20 October 2012 01:42, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Initially ondemand governor was written and then using its code conservative
> governor is written. It used a lot of code from ondemand governor, but copy of
> code was created instead of using the same routines from both governors. Which
> increased code redundancy, which is difficult to manage.
>
> This patch is an attempt to move common part of both the governors to
> cpufreq_governor.c file to come over above mentioned issues.
>
> This shouldn't change anything from functionality point of view.
>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
> This patch is *NOT TESTED*... (only compiled)
> Out of office now, so can't test it on board.
>
> Floated it, so that i can get some early comments if possible.

Didn't crashed :)
Tested both ondemand and conservative governors and they are working
fine.

>  drivers/cpufreq/Makefile               |   4 +-
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 558 +++++++------------------
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c     | 314 ++++++++++++++
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h     | 177 ++++++++
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c     | 728 ++++++++++-----------------------
>  include/linux/cpufreq.h                |   2 +-
>  6 files changed, 864 insertions(+), 919 deletions(-)

diffstat might not look awesome, but considering two new files with
file headers, #includes, etc added.. this looks reasonable :)

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