Re: [PATCH V2 4/5] PM / Domains: Factorize dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state()

[Ulf Hansson]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 at 09:10, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Separate out _genpd_set_performance_state() and
> _genpd_reeval_performance_state() from
> dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state() to handle performance state update
> related stuff. This will be used by a later commit.
>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>

Acked-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>

Kind regards
Uffe

> ---
>  drivers/base/power/domain.c | 105 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>  1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/domain.c b/drivers/base/power/domain.c
> index 0d928359b880..d6b389a9f678 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/power/domain.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/domain.c
> @@ -239,6 +239,63 @@ static void genpd_update_accounting(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd)
>  static inline void genpd_update_accounting(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd) {}
>  #endif
>
> +static int _genpd_set_performance_state(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd,
> +                                       unsigned int state)
> +{
> +       int ret;
> +
> +       ret = genpd->set_performance_state(genpd, state);
> +       if (ret)
> +               return ret;
> +
> +       genpd->performance_state = state;
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int _genpd_reeval_performance_state(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd,
> +                                          unsigned int state)
> +{
> +       struct generic_pm_domain_data *pd_data;
> +       struct pm_domain_data *pdd;
> +
> +       /* New requested state is same as Max requested state */
> +       if (state == genpd->performance_state)
> +               return 0;
> +
> +       /* New requested state is higher than Max requested state */
> +       if (state > genpd->performance_state)
> +               goto update_state;
> +
> +       /* Traverse all devices within the domain */
> +       list_for_each_entry(pdd, &genpd->dev_list, list_node) {
> +               pd_data = to_gpd_data(pdd);
> +
> +               if (pd_data->performance_state > state)
> +                       state = pd_data->performance_state;
> +       }
> +
> +       if (state == genpd->performance_state)
> +               return 0;
> +
> +       /*
> +        * We aren't propagating performance state changes of a subdomain to its
> +        * masters as we don't have hardware that needs it. Over that, the
> +        * performance states of subdomain and its masters may not have
> +        * one-to-one mapping and would require additional information. We can
> +        * get back to this once we have hardware that needs it. For that
> +        * reason, we don't have to consider performance state of the subdomains
> +        * of genpd here.
> +        */
> +
> +update_state:
> +       if (!genpd_status_on(genpd)) {
> +               genpd->performance_state = state;
> +               return 0;
> +       }
> +
> +       return _genpd_set_performance_state(genpd, state);
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state- Set performance state of device's power
>   * domain.
> @@ -257,10 +314,9 @@ static inline void genpd_update_accounting(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd) {}
>  int dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state(struct device *dev, unsigned int state)
>  {
>         struct generic_pm_domain *genpd;
> -       struct generic_pm_domain_data *gpd_data, *pd_data;
> -       struct pm_domain_data *pdd;
> +       struct generic_pm_domain_data *gpd_data;
>         unsigned int prev;
> -       int ret = 0;
> +       int ret;
>
>         genpd = dev_to_genpd(dev);
>         if (IS_ERR(genpd))
> @@ -281,47 +337,10 @@ int dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state(struct device *dev, unsigned int state)
>         prev = gpd_data->performance_state;
>         gpd_data->performance_state = state;
>
> -       /* New requested state is same as Max requested state */
> -       if (state == genpd->performance_state)
> -               goto unlock;
> -
> -       /* New requested state is higher than Max requested state */
> -       if (state > genpd->performance_state)
> -               goto update_state;
> -
> -       /* Traverse all devices within the domain */
> -       list_for_each_entry(pdd, &genpd->dev_list, list_node) {
> -               pd_data = to_gpd_data(pdd);
> -
> -               if (pd_data->performance_state > state)
> -                       state = pd_data->performance_state;
> -       }
> -
> -       if (state == genpd->performance_state)
> -               goto unlock;
> -
> -       /*
> -        * We aren't propagating performance state changes of a subdomain to its
> -        * masters as we don't have hardware that needs it. Over that, the
> -        * performance states of subdomain and its masters may not have
> -        * one-to-one mapping and would require additional information. We can
> -        * get back to this once we have hardware that needs it. For that
> -        * reason, we don't have to consider performance state of the subdomains
> -        * of genpd here.
> -        */
> -
> -update_state:
> -       if (genpd_status_on(genpd)) {
> -               ret = genpd->set_performance_state(genpd, state);
> -               if (ret) {
> -                       gpd_data->performance_state = prev;
> -                       goto unlock;
> -               }
> -       }
> -
> -       genpd->performance_state = state;
> +       ret = _genpd_reeval_performance_state(genpd, state);
> +       if (ret)
> +               gpd_data->performance_state = prev;
>
> -unlock:
>         genpd_unlock(genpd);
>
>         return ret;
> --
> 2.19.1.568.g152ad8e3369a
>