Re: [PATCH] CHROMIUM: devfreq: rk3399: Clear edev->dev drvdata before enabling dfi

From: jeffy
Date: Fri Sep 01 2017 - 21:52:02 EST


hi brian,
On 09/02/2017 08:47 AM, Brian Norris wrote:
On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 07:52:37AM +0800, Jeffy Chen wrote:
Currently we are using edev->dev drvdata to get rk3399-dmc data, but
it would be inited to edev in devfreq_event_add_edev.

So we need to clear the edev->dev drvdata before enabling dfi, to
prevent dfi from getting the wrong rk3399-dmc data when the irq
triggered too early.

Your description doesn't match your code. You say you're clearing
evdev->dev driver data but...

Signed-off-by: Jeffy Chen <jeffy.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---

drivers/devfreq/rk3399_dmc.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/rk3399_dmc.c b/drivers/devfreq/rk3399_dmc.c
index 1b89ebbad02c..12f9f03f349f 100644
--- a/drivers/devfreq/rk3399_dmc.c
+++ b/drivers/devfreq/rk3399_dmc.c
@@ -429,6 +429,7 @@ static int rk3399_dmcfreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)

rk3399_devfreq_dmc_profile.initial_freq = data->rate;

+ platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL);

...here you're only clearing the drvdata for the platform device. Is
that a mistake? (Hint: that's not what you uploaded on the Chromium OS
instance, where you presumably tested this.)

And if you're really trying to do what your commit message says:

We're having two different files fight over who owns the edev drvdata?
That seems like a big no-no.

We should work out who's the real owner of 'drvdata', and find some
other solution for the others.

sorry, indeed...it turns out the upstream dmc driver is not using dfi(it's simple_onfemand below ;)...

so we don't need thus patch for upstream kernel...or maybe we should submit other cros patches(contains the one causes this issue, and this patch)

Brian

data->devfreq = devm_devfreq_add_device(dev,
&rk3399_devfreq_dmc_profile,
"simple_ondemand",
--
2.11.0