Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751313AbdCPF1g (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Mar 2017 01:27:36 -0400 Received: from mail-pg0-f45.google.com ([74.125.83.45]:32818 "EHLO mail-pg0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751282AbdCPF1f (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Mar 2017 01:27:35 -0400 From: Viresh Kumar To: Rafael Wysocki , Javi Merino , Zhang Rui , Eduardo Valentin Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vincent Guittot , Amit Daniel Kachhap , Viresh Kumar Subject: [PATCH 00/17] thermal: cpu_cooling: improve interaction with cpufreq core Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 10:56:58 +0530 Message-Id: X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.7.1.410.g6faf27b Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3121 Lines: 72 Hi Guys, The cpu_cooling driver is designed to use CPU frequency scaling to avoid high thermal states for a platform. But it wasn't glued really well with cpufreq core. This series tries to improve interactions between cpufreq core and cpu_cooling driver and does some fixes/cleanups to the cpu_cooling driver. I am a bit confused about which tree this series should go through, PM or thermal. This series has dependency on few other patches which are already merged in the PM [1] tree and thermal [2] tree. As this is 4.12 material, all of this should go through only one tree to avoid conflicts. I assume that one of Rafael and Rui have to drop the existing patch(es) from their trees and let the other one apply all of these. I would let you guys decide on that. Sorry for the trouble. I have tested it on ARM 32 (exynos) and 64 bit (hikey) boards and have pushed them for 0-day build bot and kernel CI testing as well. We should know if something is broken with these. @Javi: It would be good if you can give them a test, specially because of your work on the "power" specific bits in the driver. Pushed here as well: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vireshk/pm.git thermal/cooling -- viresh [1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=148946890403271&w=2 [2] https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=148644060126593&w=2 Viresh Kumar (17): thermal: cpu_cooling: Avoid accessing potentially freed structures thermal: cpu_cooling: rearrange globals thermal: cpu_cooling: Replace cpufreq_device with cpufreq_dev thermal: cpu_cooling: replace cool_dev with cdev thermal: cpu_cooling: remove cpufreq_cooling_get_level() thermal: cpu_cooling: get rid of a variable in cpufreq_set_cur_state() thermal: cpu_cooling: use cpufreq_policy to register cooling device cpufreq: create cpufreq_table_count_valid_entries() thermal: cpu_cooling: store cpufreq policy thermal: cpu_cooling: OPPs are registered for all CPUs thermal: cpu_cooling: get rid of 'allowed_cpus' thermal: cpu_cooling: merge frequency and power tables thermal: cpu_cooling: create structure for idle time stats thermal: cpu_cooling: get_level() can't fail thermal: cpu_cooling: don't store cpu_dev in cpufreq_dev thermal: cpu_cooling: 'freq' can't be zero in cpufreq_state2power() thermal: cpu_cooling: Rearrange struct cpufreq_cooling_device drivers/cpufreq/arm_big_little.c | 2 +- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c | 2 +- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_stats.c | 13 +- drivers/cpufreq/dbx500-cpufreq.c | 2 +- drivers/cpufreq/mt8173-cpufreq.c | 4 +- drivers/cpufreq/qoriq-cpufreq.c | 3 +- drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 530 ++++++++------------- drivers/thermal/imx_thermal.c | 22 +- drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-thermal-common.c | 22 +- include/linux/cpu_cooling.h | 32 +- include/linux/cpufreq.h | 14 + 11 files changed, 272 insertions(+), 374 deletions(-) -- 2.7.1.410.g6faf27b