[RFC PATCH] PM / OPP: move cpufreq specific OPP functions out of generic OPP library

[Nishanth Menon]

On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 12:22 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar at linaro.org> wrote:
> On 2 May 2014 10:48, Nishanth Menon <nm at ti.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar at linaro.org> wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_opp.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_opp.c
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..2602ff8
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_opp.c
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * Generic OPP Interface for CPUFREQ drivers
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Copyright (C) 2009-2014 Texas Instruments Incorporated.
>>>> + *     Nishanth Menon
>>>> + *     Romit Dasgupta
>>>> + *     Kevin Hilman
>>>> + *
>>>> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>>>> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
>>>> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
>>>> + */
>>>
>>> I hope you have just copy pasted routines to this file, and haven't done
>>> even the most minor modification in those, as its hard to review it.
>>
>> there is code replacement ofcourse ->
>> * the logic of walking down the list holding a mutex has been replaced
>> with rcu locks,
>> * instead of reading internal data structure and generating the list,
>> use the existing search API that does exactly the same.
>> * Documentation update for the same.
>
> Hmm, actually if I would have written this patch, then probably I would
> have done the same thing, but looking from the reviewers perspective,
> it would be much more easy if we can separate things into patches.
>
> So, maybe do these changes first in opp.c only and then finally a
> patch that just moves things around.
>
>> Both are needed if you have to move the code out. functionally, both
>> are equivalent
>
> That's an assumption and we never know when we might have screwed
> the code :) .. And so more careful review of those parts is required :)

True. Will do the same as suggested for the formal series. Thanks for
your feedback and review.

Regards,
Nishanth Menon