Re: [PATCH V4 2/3] thermal/drivers/cpu_cooling: Unregister with the policy

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:58 AM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On 28/06/2019 11:12, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:02 PM Daniel Lezcano
> > <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> Currently the function cpufreq_cooling_register() returns a cooling
> >> device pointer which is used back as a pointer to call the function
> >> cpufreq_cooling_unregister(). Even if it is correct, it would make
> >> sense to not leak the structure inside a cpufreq driver and keep the
> >> code thermal code self-encapsulate. Moreover, that forces to add an
> >> extra variable in each driver using this function.
> >>
> >> Instead of passing the cooling device to unregister, pass the policy.
> >>
> >> Because the cpufreq_cooling_unregister() function uses the policy to
> >> unregister itself. The only purpose of the cooling device pointer is
> >> to unregister the cpu cooling device.
> >>
> >> As there is no more need of this pointer, remove it.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > This doesn't apply for me.
> >
> > Care to rebase it on top of the Linus' tree?
>
> Sure but the patch depends on 1/3 which is in bleeding edge. Shall I
> rebase the 3 patches on v5.2-rc6 and resend ?

You can do that.

Alternatively, you can rebase on top of my linux-next branch.