Re: [PATCH Resend] driver/core: cpu: initialize opp table

[Sudeep Holla]

On 21/05/14 10:41, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 21 May 2014 15:05, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > As Rafael mentioned it's better to have a wrapper function to hide these
> > details. You should consider the fact that of_init_opp_table returns -EINVAL
> > if
> > CONFIG_PM_OPP not defined as well as when the list is invalid in the DT.
> > IMO we can return -ENOSYS if not implemented(i.e. !CONFIG_PM_OPP)
>
> I didn't understood Rafael's comment as I couldn't figure out if he is just
> pointing to CONFIG_** or some arch specific thing..
>
> But it looks more obvious that he asked me something similar to what you
> are saying :)

I believe so, mainly the non-DT case, since you are checking for error, it will
end up with spurious messages as the return value is -EINVAL. Hence I was
suggesting return -ENOSYS(which means Function not implemented)

> Why do we need to return anything? Let that function have return type 'void'?

Hmm, don't we still need to throw error if DT has invalid OPP ?
It doesn't may sense to me if no errors is returned and still CPUFreq fails
later.

> Also would it make sense to move this into it as well?
>
> cpu->dev.of_node = of_get_cpu_node(num, NULL);

I don't quite understand what you mean here ?

Regards,
Sudeep

--
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/