[PATCH v5 4/5] thermal: devfreq_cooling: Refactor code and switch to use Energy Model

[Lukasz Luba]

On 4/3/20 6:44 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 18/03/2020 12:45, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>> The overhauled Energy Model (EM) framework support also devfreq devices.
>> The unified API interface of the EM can be used in the thermal subsystem to
>> not duplicate code. The power table now is taken from EM structure and
>> there is no need to maintain calculation for it locally. In case when the
>> EM is not provided by the device a simple interface for cooling device is
>> used.
>>
>> There is also an improvement in code related to enabling/disabling OPPs,
>> which prevents from race condition with devfreq governors.
>>
>> [lkp: Reported the build warning]
>> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp at intel.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt at goodmis.org> # for tracing code
>> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba at arm.com>
> 
> The changes are too big, please split this patch into smaller chunks.

OK, I will split it and re-base on top of thermal testing.

> 
>> ---
>>   drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c | 474 ++++++++++++++++--------------
>>   include/linux/devfreq_cooling.h   |  39 +--
>>   include/trace/events/thermal.h    |  19 +-
>>   3 files changed, 277 insertions(+), 255 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/devfreq_cooling.c
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
>>   struct devfreq_cooling_device {
>>   	int id;
>>   	struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
>>   	struct devfreq *devfreq;
>>   	unsigned long cooling_state;
>> -	u32 *power_table;
>>   	u32 *freq_table;
>> -	size_t freq_table_size;
>> +	size_t max_level;
> 
> Could you rename it to 'max_state' ?

Yes.

Thank you for your comments.

Regards,
Lukasz