Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: tegra: update comment for clarity

[Stephen Warren]

On 06/05/2014 10:38 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Tegra's driver got updated a bit (00917dd cpufreq: Tegra: implement intermediate
> frequency callbacks) and implements new 'intermediate freq' infrastructure of
> core. Above commit updated comments about when to call
> clk_prepare_enable(pll_x_clk) and Doug wasn't satisfied with those comments and
> said this:
> 
>> The "Though when target-freq is intermediate freq, we don't need to
>> take this reference." makes me think that this function is actually
>> called when target-freq is intermediate freq.  I don't think it is,
>> right?
> 
> For better clarity just make that comment more explicit about when we call
> tegra_target_intermediate(). Wasn't sure if we actually need a commit for this,
> but anyway lets other decide if its worth enough :)

> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/tegra-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/tegra-cpufreq.c
> index a5fbc0a..48bc89b 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/tegra-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/tegra-cpufreq.c
> @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ static int tegra_target_intermediate(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>  	 * off when we move the cpu off of it as enabling it again while we
>  	 * switch to it from tegra_target() would take additional time. Though
>  	 * when target-freq is intermediate freq, we don't need to take this
> -	 * reference.
> +	 * reference and so this routine isn't called at all.
>  	 */
>  	clk_prepare_enable(pll_x_clk);

I would remove the word "so" in the added line; the function is not
called because we don't need to use an intermediate frequency, not
because we don't need to take a reference to pll_x. With that change,

Reviewed-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
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/