| Message ID | 7163e57cfa1780d42732fa6b5ec424c24d1d4dc8.1563270828.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | None | expand |
Hi Viresh, Please always Cc: me on fbdev patches. On 7/16/19 11:54 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > The cpufreq policy notifier's CPUFREQ_ADJUST notification is going to > get removed soon. > > The notifier callback sa1100fb_freq_policy() isn't doing anything apart > from printing a debug message on CPUFREQ_ADJUST notification. There is > no point in keeping an otherwise empty callback and registering the > notifier. > > Remove it. > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com> Best regards, -- Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Samsung R&D Institute Poland Samsung Electronics
On 16-07-19, 14:25, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > Hi Viresh, > > Please always Cc: me on fbdev patches. That happened because I used patter-depth=1 in my script for finding maintainers from get_maintainers. Sorry about that. I have incremented that by one now. -- viresh
diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/sa1100fb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/sa1100fb.c index f7f8dee044b1..ae2bcfee338a 100644 --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/sa1100fb.c +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/sa1100fb.c @@ -1005,31 +1005,6 @@ sa1100fb_freq_transition(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, } return 0; } - -static int -sa1100fb_freq_policy(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, - void *data) -{ - struct sa1100fb_info *fbi = TO_INF(nb, freq_policy); - struct cpufreq_policy *policy = data; - - switch (val) { - case CPUFREQ_ADJUST: - dev_dbg(fbi->dev, "min dma period: %d ps, " - "new clock %d kHz\n", sa1100fb_min_dma_period(fbi), - policy->max); - /* todo: fill in min/max values */ - break; - case CPUFREQ_NOTIFY: - do {} while(0); - /* todo: panic if min/max values aren't fulfilled - * [can't really happen unless there's a bug in the - * CPU policy verififcation process * - */ - break; - } - return 0; -} #endif #ifdef CONFIG_PM @@ -1242,9 +1217,7 @@ static int sa1100fb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ fbi->freq_transition.notifier_call = sa1100fb_freq_transition; - fbi->freq_policy.notifier_call = sa1100fb_freq_policy; cpufreq_register_notifier(&fbi->freq_transition, CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER); - cpufreq_register_notifier(&fbi->freq_policy, CPUFREQ_POLICY_NOTIFIER); #endif /* This driver cannot be unloaded at the moment */ diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/sa1100fb.h b/drivers/video/fbdev/sa1100fb.h index 7a1a9ca33cec..d0aa33b0b88a 100644 --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/sa1100fb.h +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/sa1100fb.h @@ -64,7 +64,6 @@ struct sa1100fb_info { #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ struct notifier_block freq_transition; - struct notifier_block freq_policy; #endif const struct sa1100fb_mach_info *inf;
The cpufreq policy notifier's CPUFREQ_ADJUST notification is going to get removed soon. The notifier callback sa1100fb_freq_policy() isn't doing anything apart from printing a debug message on CPUFREQ_ADJUST notification. There is no point in keeping an otherwise empty callback and registering the notifier. Remove it. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> --- drivers/video/fbdev/sa1100fb.c | 27 --------------------------- drivers/video/fbdev/sa1100fb.h | 1 - 2 files changed, 28 deletions(-) -- 2.21.0.rc0.269.g1a574e7a288b