Re: [PATCH 6/9] OPP: Extend support for the opp-level beyond required-opps

From: Viresh Kumar
Date: Wed Oct 04 2023 - 01:04:37 EST


On 03-10-23, 14:36, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> Can you please explain further on this. Rafael has acked those
> patches, so it should be perfectly fine for you to pick them via your
> tree too. There is no need to defer them.

Ahh, then it is fine.

> > I will then push out a branch and you can
> > rebase your patches on top of it ? And then probably Sudeep or someone else can
> > apply everything ?
>
> Or are you suggesting to just take one of the patches from my series,
> and then I will re-base everything on top?
>
> Just trying to understand the way forward. :-)

Applied patches 1-6/9 and the fixed routine looks like this now:

+static int _set_opp_level(struct device *dev, struct opp_table *opp_table,
+ struct dev_pm_opp *opp)
+{
+ unsigned int level = 0;
+ int ret = 0;
+
+ if (opp) {
+ if (!opp->level)
+ return 0;
+
+ level = opp->level;
+ }
+
+ /* Request a new performance state through the device's PM domain. */
+ ret = dev_pm_domain_set_performance_state(dev, level);
+ if (ret)
+ dev_err(dev, "Failed to set performance state %u (%d)\n", level,
+ ret);
+
+ return ret;
+}

Does it look okay now ?

--
viresh