Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 9 Mar 2021 09:19:00 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc:     Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 1/2] topology: Allow multiple entities to provide
 sched_freq_tick() callback
Message-ID: <20210309091900.GA27747@willie-the-truck>
References: <cover.1614580695.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
 <a34f549bc75eecd4804aebb7b7794b45769eccf0.1614580695.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
 <20210308145209.GA26458@willie-the-truck>
 <20210309041643.tcyv6rpto4k3sv5v@vireshk-i7>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210309041643.tcyv6rpto4k3sv5v@vireshk-i7>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 09:46:43AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 08-03-21, 14:52, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 12:21:17PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(topology_set_scale_freq_source);
> > 
> > I don't get why you need to export this in this patch. The arm64 topology
> > code is never built as a module.
> > 
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(topology_clear_scale_freq_source);
> > 
> > Same here.
> > 
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(freq_scale);
> > 
> > And here.
> 
> After this patch, any part of the kernel can use these
> helpers/variables to run their own implementation of tick-freq-scale
> and so this patch looked to be the right place for that to me.
> 
> And the second patch in the series updates the CPPC cpufreq driver
> (tristate) to use these exported symbols, so we have the first user
> who needs the exported symbols as well.

Ok, then how about putting the exports in their own patch that immediately
precedes the patch which uses them? I think that would make it much clearer.

> > This one probably wants a less generic name as well if it's going
> > to be exported.
> 
> x86 names it arch_freq_scale, perhaps we should stick to that instead.

Sounds like a improvement, thanks.

Will