24.12.2020 09:28, Viresh Kumar пишет:
On 23-12-20, 23:36, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
23.12.2020 07:34, Viresh Kumar пишет:
On 22-12-20, 22:19, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
22.12.2020 12:12, Viresh Kumar пишет:
rate will be 0 for both the OPPs here if rate_not_available is true and so this change shouldn't be required.
The rate_not_available is negated in the condition. This change is required because both rates are 0 and then we should proceed to the levels comparison.
Won't that happen without this patch ?
No
This is how the code looks like currently:
int _opp_compare_key(struct dev_pm_opp *opp1, struct dev_pm_opp *opp2) { if (opp1->rate != opp2->rate) return opp1->rate < opp2->rate ? -1 : 1; if (opp1->bandwidth && opp2->bandwidth && opp1->bandwidth[0].peak != opp2->bandwidth[0].peak) return opp1->bandwidth[0].peak < opp2->bandwidth[0].peak ? -1 : 1; if (opp1->level != opp2->level) return opp1->level < opp2->level ? -1 : 1; return 0; }
Lets consider the case you are focussing on, where rate is 0 for both the OPPs, bandwidth isn't there and we want to run the level comparison here.
Since both the rates are 0, (opp1->rate != opp2->rate) will fail and so we will move to bandwidth check which will fail too. And so we will get to the level comparison.
What am I missing here ? I am sure there is something for sure as you won't have missed this..
Ah, you're right. It was me who was missing something as I see now, after taking a closer look and trying to implement yours suggestion, my bad. I'll improve this patch in the next revision, thanks!