Re: [PATCH V2 4/8] PM / OPP: Pass struct dev_pm_opp_supply to _set_opp_voltage()

2016-10-25 Thread Viresh Kumar
On 25-10-16, 13:26, Stephen Boyd wrote: > For things like AVS we'll probably want to do that, although it's > sort of funny because replacing RCU with rw-locks is the opposite > direction most people go. Yes, that would be very funny :) > With AVS we would be updating the > voltage(s) in use for

Re: [PATCH V2 4/8] PM / OPP: Pass struct dev_pm_opp_supply to _set_opp_voltage()

2016-10-25 Thread Stephen Boyd
On 10/25, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 24-10-16, 16:14, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > On 10/20, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > Pass the entire supply structure instead of all of its fields. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar > > > --- > > > > This patch should be combined with the previous one. > > I thi

Re: [PATCH V2 4/8] PM / OPP: Pass struct dev_pm_opp_supply to _set_opp_voltage()

2016-10-24 Thread Viresh Kumar
On 24-10-16, 16:14, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 10/20, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > Pass the entire supply structure instead of all of its fields. > > > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar > > --- > > This patch should be combined with the previous one. I think it is a fair to do this separately as this is a

Re: [PATCH V2 4/8] PM / OPP: Pass struct dev_pm_opp_supply to _set_opp_voltage()

2016-10-24 Thread Stephen Boyd
On 10/20, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Pass the entire supply structure instead of all of its fields. > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar > --- This patch should be combined with the previous one. I'm still not sure if it even makes sense to do this though. Do we really have to make duplicate "OPP snapshot

[PATCH V2 4/8] PM / OPP: Pass struct dev_pm_opp_supply to _set_opp_voltage()

2016-10-20 Thread Viresh Kumar
Pass the entire supply structure instead of all of its fields. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar --- drivers/base/power/opp/core.c | 44 +-- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/base/power/opp/core.c b/drivers/base/power/opp/co