[Lima] [PATCH 27/31] PM / devfreq: rk3399_dmc: convert to use devm_pm_opp_* API

[Chanwoo Choi]

Hi,

Do you make this patch on latest source?
When I apply this patch for test, it make the merge conflict error.

On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 12:57 PM Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Use devm_pm_opp_* API to simplify code. Since devres release
> can guarantee the order, let's remove
> devm_devfreq_unregister_opp_notifier().
>
> Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz at gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/devfreq/rk3399_dmc.c | 22 +++-------------------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/rk3399_dmc.c b/drivers/devfreq/rk3399_dmc.c
> index 2e912166a993..9b8ab8be29d1 100644
> --- a/drivers/devfreq/rk3399_dmc.c
> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/rk3399_dmc.c
> @@ -432,7 +432,7 @@ static int rk3399_dmcfreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>          * We add a devfreq driver to our parent since it has a device tree node
>          * with operating points.
>          */
> -       if (dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(dev)) {
> +       if (devm_pm_opp_of_add_table(dev)) {
>                 dev_err(dev, "Invalid operating-points in device tree.\n");
>                 ret = -EINVAL;
>                 goto err_edev;
> @@ -448,7 +448,7 @@ static int rk3399_dmcfreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>         opp = devfreq_recommended_opp(dev, &data->rate, 0);
>         if (IS_ERR(opp)) {
>                 ret = PTR_ERR(opp);
> -               goto err_free_opp;
> +               goto err_edev;
>         }
>
>         data->rate = dev_pm_opp_get_freq(opp);
> @@ -463,7 +463,7 @@ static int rk3399_dmcfreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>                                            &data->ondemand_data);
>         if (IS_ERR(data->devfreq)) {
>                 ret = PTR_ERR(data->devfreq);
> -               goto err_free_opp;
> +               goto err_edev;
>         }
>
>         devm_devfreq_register_opp_notifier(dev, data->devfreq);
> @@ -473,27 +473,12 @@ static int rk3399_dmcfreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
>         return 0;
>
> -err_free_opp:
> -       dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(&pdev->dev);
>  err_edev:
>         devfreq_event_disable_edev(data->edev);
>
>         return ret;
>  }
>
> -static int rk3399_dmcfreq_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> -{
> -       struct rk3399_dmcfreq *dmcfreq = dev_get_drvdata(&pdev->dev);
> -
> -       /*
> -        * Before remove the opp table we need to unregister the opp notifier.
> -        */
> -       devm_devfreq_unregister_opp_notifier(dmcfreq->dev, dmcfreq->devfreq);
> -       dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(dmcfreq->dev);

As the comment, we need to unregister the opp notifier before removing the OPP.
Do you guarantee this sequence on your patch?


> -
> -       return 0;
> -}
> -
>  static const struct of_device_id rk3399dmc_devfreq_of_match[] = {
>         { .compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-dmc" },
>         { },
> @@ -502,7 +487,6 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rk3399dmc_devfreq_of_match);
>
>  static struct platform_driver rk3399_dmcfreq_driver = {
>         .probe  = rk3399_dmcfreq_probe,
> -       .remove = rk3399_dmcfreq_remove,
>         .driver = {
>                 .name   = "rk3399-dmc-freq",
>                 .pm     = &rk3399_dmcfreq_pm,
> --
> 2.25.1
>


-- 
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi