On 04/15/2013 03:54 PM, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
Hi Daniel,
On 04/15/2013 03:29 PM, Daniel Lezcano :
In order to split the pm code from the cpuidle driver, add an ops for the standby function which will be initialized by the pm init functions directly, thus no need of the SoC specific headers.
Cleanup also the headers included in this file as they are no longer needed.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano daniel.lezcano@linaro.org
arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c | 19 ++++--------------- arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c | 8 +++++++- 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c index 48f1228..b2bec92 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c @@ -13,32 +13,21 @@
- #2 wait-for-interrupt and RAM self refresh
*/ -#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/module.h> #include <linux/init.h> -#include <linux/platform_device.h> #include <linux/cpuidle.h> -#include <linux/io.h> -#include <linux/export.h> -#include <asm/proc-fns.h> #include <asm/cpuidle.h> -#include <mach/cpu.h>
-#include "pm.h" #define AT91_MAX_STATES 2 +extern void (*at91_standby_ops)(void);
/* Actual code that puts the SoC in different idle states */ static int at91_enter_idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev, struct cpuidle_driver *drv, int index) {
- if (cpu_is_at91rm9200())
at91rm9200_standby();- else if (cpu_is_at91sam9g45())
at91sam9g45_standby();- else
at91sam9_standby();
- at91_standby_ops(); return index;
} diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c index 73f1f25..f456e86 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c @@ -39,6 +39,8 @@ #include "at91_rstc.h" #include "at91_shdwc.h" +void (*at91_standby_ops)(void);
Is this a common pattern to have such a floating function pointer in the pm code?
Well, already seen but I agree it is not really nice.
The idea I had was to convert little by little all these pm functions into ops, then order, group and use them to initialize the cpuidle drivers through a single ARM driver. The correct order would have been to convert first these to ops then move the driver but there are so many drivers, so many code, I don't know where do I start.
Do you have a suggestion ?
static void __init show_reset_status(void) { static char reset[] __initdata = "reset"; @@ -321,8 +323,12 @@ static int __init at91_pm_init(void) pr_info("AT91: Power Management%s\n", (slow_clock ? " (with slow clock mode)" : "")); /* AT91RM9200 SDRAM low-power mode cannot be used with self-refresh. */
- if (cpu_is_at91rm9200())
- if (cpu_is_at91rm9200()) { at91_ramc_write(0, AT91RM9200_SDRAMC_LPR, 0);
at91_standby_ops = at91rm9200_standby;- } else if (cpu_is_at91sam9g45())
CodingStyle: ending "{" is missing.
at91_standby_ops= at91sam9g45_standby;CodingStyle: " " is missing
- else at91_standby_ops = at91sam9_standby;
CodingStyle: not on the same line + "{}" missing
suspend_set_ops(&at91_pm_ops);
I am in favor for the move.
Ok, cool.
But please rewrite a new series.
Yes, sure, that was a draft.
Thanks for the review.
-- Daniel