Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | From | Ulf Hansson <> | Date | Tue, 12 Dec 2023 14:42:23 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] PM: domains: Drop the unused pm_genpd_opp_to_performance_state() |
| |
On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 at 12:59, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 11:37 AM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 21:44, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 4:19 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Since commit 7c41cdcd3bbe ("OPP: Simplify the over-designed pstate <-> > > > > level dance"), there is no longer any users of the > > > > pm_genpd_opp_to_performance_state() API. Let's therefore drop it and its > > > > corresponding ->opp_to_performance_state() callback, which also no longer > > > > has any users. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> > > > > > > I can take this in principle, but I'm wondering if you'd prefer to > > > apply patches modifying domain.c yourself? They are definitely > > > related to the pmdomain tree. > > > > Yes, it makes sense for me to pick the genpd core patches through the > > pmdomain tree. In some cases there may be overlapping patches that are > > more generic and not only limited to genpd, but I guess we can decide > > on a case by case basis for those ones. > > > > I can add the pmdomain tree to the GENERIC PM DOMAINS section in the > > MAINTAINERS file to reflect this, if you think this is a good idea? > > Yes, please. > > What about moving drivers/base/power/domain.c to drivers/pmdomain/ ?
Yes, it seems reasonable to do that too. I will send a patch for you to have a look at shortly.
Kind regards Uffe
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |