| Message ID | a7867661e9bc6f5b1571f60398266ef678ccc1c0.1513926033.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/7] PM / OPP: Implement dev_pm_opp_of_add_table_indexed() | expand |
On 22 March 2018 at 10:59, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: > On 22-03-18, 10:30, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> On 22 December 2017 at 08:26, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: >> > The power-domain core would be using the OPP core going forward and the >> > OPP core has the basic requirement of a device structure for its working. >> >> According to the OPP core also seems to require the ->dev.of_node to >> be set. Actually, it seems like that part belongs in patch4 instead, >> while starting to make use of the opp OF APIs. Could you please move >> it? > > You meaning setting of the of_node to the next patch? I can do that if that;s > what you want. Yes, please. > >> > +static struct bus_type genpd_bus_type = { >> > + .name = "genpd", >> > +}; >> >> This seems silly. Can't we just avoid having a bus type altogether, >> thus no need to call bus_register() as well? > > I thought we need a bus where we want to add the device, haven't tried with that > pointer being empty. Will try that and let you know. Great! > >> > + >> > /** >> > * pm_genpd_init - Initialize a generic I/O PM domain object. >> > * @genpd: PM domain object to initialize. >> > @@ -1687,6 +1691,18 @@ int pm_genpd_init(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd, >> > return ret; >> > } >> > >> > + genpd->dev.bus = &genpd_bus_type; >> > + device_initialize(&genpd->dev); >> > + dev_set_name(&genpd->dev, "%s", genpd->name); >> > + >> > + ret = device_add(&genpd->dev); >> >> What's the point of adding the device? Can we skip this step, as I >> guess the opp core is only using the device as cookie rather actual >> using it? No? > > We also use it for the OPP debugfs stuff, so that would be required I believe. Right, however, isn't that only using the dev_name(dev), which you don't need to add the device to make use of. Or maybe I missing something around this... > We also use it for playing with clk/regulator stuff as well, though we may not > use it in genpd case for now. > > -- > viresh Kind regards Uffe
diff --git a/drivers/base/power/domain.c b/drivers/base/power/domain.c index 0c80bea05bcb..013c1e206167 100644 --- a/drivers/base/power/domain.c +++ b/drivers/base/power/domain.c @@ -1630,6 +1630,10 @@ static void genpd_lock_init(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd) } } +static struct bus_type genpd_bus_type = { + .name = "genpd", +}; + /** * pm_genpd_init - Initialize a generic I/O PM domain object. * @genpd: PM domain object to initialize. @@ -1687,6 +1691,18 @@ int pm_genpd_init(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd, return ret; } + genpd->dev.bus = &genpd_bus_type; + device_initialize(&genpd->dev); + dev_set_name(&genpd->dev, "%s", genpd->name); + + ret = device_add(&genpd->dev); + if (ret) { + dev_err(&genpd->dev, "failed to add device: %d\n", ret); + put_device(&genpd->dev); + kfree(genpd->free); + return ret; + } + mutex_lock(&gpd_list_lock); list_add(&genpd->gpd_list_node, &gpd_list); mutex_unlock(&gpd_list_lock); @@ -1724,6 +1740,7 @@ static int genpd_remove(struct generic_pm_domain *genpd) list_del(&genpd->gpd_list_node); genpd_unlock(genpd); + device_del(&genpd->dev); cancel_work_sync(&genpd->power_off_work); kfree(genpd->free); pr_debug("%s: removed %s\n", __func__, genpd->name); @@ -1888,6 +1905,7 @@ int of_genpd_add_provider_simple(struct device_node *np, if (!ret) { genpd->provider = &np->fwnode; genpd->has_provider = true; + genpd->dev.of_node = np; } } @@ -1924,6 +1942,7 @@ int of_genpd_add_provider_onecell(struct device_node *np, data->domains[i]->provider = &np->fwnode; data->domains[i]->has_provider = true; + data->domains[i]->dev.of_node = np; } ret = genpd_add_provider(np, data->xlate, data); @@ -2691,3 +2710,21 @@ static void __exit genpd_debug_exit(void) } __exitcall(genpd_debug_exit); #endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_FS */ + +static int __init pm_genpd_core_init(void) +{ + int ret; + + ret = bus_register(&genpd_bus_type); + if (ret) + pr_err("bus_register failed (%d)\n", ret); + + return ret; +} +pure_initcall(pm_genpd_core_init); + +static void __exit pm_genpd_core_exit(void) +{ + bus_unregister(&genpd_bus_type); +} +__exitcall(pm_genpd_core_exit); diff --git a/include/linux/pm_domain.h b/include/linux/pm_domain.h index 04dbef9847d3..aaacaa35005d 100644 --- a/include/linux/pm_domain.h +++ b/include/linux/pm_domain.h @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ struct genpd_power_state { struct genpd_lock_ops; struct generic_pm_domain { + struct device dev; struct dev_pm_domain domain; /* PM domain operations */ struct list_head gpd_list_node; /* Node in the global PM domains list */ struct list_head master_links; /* Links with PM domain as a master */
The power-domain core would be using the OPP core going forward and the OPP core has the basic requirement of a device structure for its working. Add a struct device to the genpd structure and also add a genpd bus type for the devices. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> --- drivers/base/power/domain.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/linux/pm_domain.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 38 insertions(+) -- 2.15.0.194.g9af6a3dea062