[v2] ACPI: processor: idle: enhance and cleancode for cpuidle state

[PATCH v2 5/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Remove useless codes about the verification of cstate count

Posted by Huisong Li 1 month, 2 weeks ago

The acpi_processor_setup_cstates and acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx will
be called after successfully obtaining the power information. These setup
functions have their own main role, but also verify the validity of cstate
count.

Actually, the acpi_processor_get_power_info_cst will return failure if the
cstate count is zero and acpi_processor_get_power_info will return failure.

So the verification of cstate count in these functions are useless.

No intentional functional impact.

Signed-off-by: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 22 +++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
index 4627b00257e6..1f332f02d273 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
@@ -732,8 +732,8 @@ static int __cpuidle acpi_idle_enter_s2idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
-					   struct cpuidle_device *dev)
+static void acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
+					    struct cpuidle_device *dev)
 {
 	int i, count = ACPI_IDLE_STATE_START;
 	struct acpi_processor_cx *cx;
@@ -753,14 +753,9 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
 		if (count == CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX)
 			break;
 	}
-
-	if (!count)
-		return -EINVAL;
-
-	return 0;
 }
 
-static int acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
+static void acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
 {
 	int i, count;
 	struct acpi_processor_cx *cx;
@@ -822,11 +817,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
 	}
 
 	drv->state_count = count;
-
-	if (!count)
-		return -EINVAL;
-
-	return 0;
 }
 
 static inline void acpi_processor_cstate_first_run_checks(void)
@@ -1248,7 +1238,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_states(struct acpi_processor *pr)
 	if (pr->flags.has_lpi)
 		return acpi_processor_setup_lpi_states(pr);
 
-	return acpi_processor_setup_cstates(pr);
+	acpi_processor_setup_cstates(pr);
+	return 0;
 }
 
 /**
@@ -1268,7 +1259,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_dev(struct acpi_processor *pr,
 	if (pr->flags.has_lpi)
 		return 0;
 
-	return acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(pr, dev);
+	acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(pr, dev);
+	return 0;
 }
 
 static int acpi_processor_get_power_info(struct acpi_processor *pr)
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Remove useless codes about the verification of cstate count

Posted by Rafael J. Wysocki 1 month, 2 weeks ago

On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 9:42 AM Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> The acpi_processor_setup_cstates and acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx will
> be called after successfully obtaining the power information. These setup
> functions have their own main role, but also verify the validity of cstate
> count.
>
> Actually, the acpi_processor_get_power_info_cst will return failure if the
> cstate count is zero and acpi_processor_get_power_info will return failure.
>
> So the verification of cstate count in these functions are useless.
>
> No intentional functional impact.
>
> Signed-off-by: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 22 +++++++---------------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
> index 4627b00257e6..1f332f02d273 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
> @@ -732,8 +732,8 @@ static int __cpuidle acpi_idle_enter_s2idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
>         return 0;
>  }
>
> -static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> -                                          struct cpuidle_device *dev)
> +static void acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> +                                           struct cpuidle_device *dev)
>  {
>         int i, count = ACPI_IDLE_STATE_START;
>         struct acpi_processor_cx *cx;
> @@ -753,14 +753,9 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
>                 if (count == CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX)
>                         break;
>         }
> -
> -       if (!count)
> -               return -EINVAL;
> -
> -       return 0;
>  }
>
> -static int acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> +static void acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>  {
>         int i, count;
>         struct acpi_processor_cx *cx;
> @@ -822,11 +817,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>         }
>
>         drv->state_count = count;
> -
> -       if (!count)
> -               return -EINVAL;
> -
> -       return 0;
>  }
>
>  static inline void acpi_processor_cstate_first_run_checks(void)
> @@ -1248,7 +1238,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_states(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>         if (pr->flags.has_lpi)
>                 return acpi_processor_setup_lpi_states(pr);
>
> -       return acpi_processor_setup_cstates(pr);
> +       acpi_processor_setup_cstates(pr);
> +       return 0;
>  }
>
>  /**
> @@ -1268,7 +1259,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_dev(struct acpi_processor *pr,
>         if (pr->flags.has_lpi)
>                 return 0;
>
> -       return acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(pr, dev);
> +       acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(pr, dev);
> +       return 0;
>  }
>
>  static int acpi_processor_get_power_info(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> --

Does this patch depend on the previous patches in the series?  If it
doesn't, why don't you send it independently?

Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Remove useless codes about the verification of cstate count

Posted by lihuisong (C) 1 month, 1 week ago

在 2025/11/4 2:10, Rafael J. Wysocki 写道:
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 9:42 AM Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com> wrote:
>> The acpi_processor_setup_cstates and acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx will
>> be called after successfully obtaining the power information. These setup
>> functions have their own main role, but also verify the validity of cstate
>> count.
>>
>> Actually, the acpi_processor_get_power_info_cst will return failure if the
>> cstate count is zero and acpi_processor_get_power_info will return failure.
>>
>> So the verification of cstate count in these functions are useless.
>>
>> No intentional functional impact.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 22 +++++++---------------
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
>> index 4627b00257e6..1f332f02d273 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
>> @@ -732,8 +732,8 @@ static int __cpuidle acpi_idle_enter_s2idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
>>          return 0;
>>   }
>>
>> -static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
>> -                                          struct cpuidle_device *dev)
>> +static void acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
>> +                                           struct cpuidle_device *dev)
>>   {
>>          int i, count = ACPI_IDLE_STATE_START;
>>          struct acpi_processor_cx *cx;
>> @@ -753,14 +753,9 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
>>                  if (count == CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX)
>>                          break;
>>          }
>> -
>> -       if (!count)
>> -               return -EINVAL;
>> -
>> -       return 0;
>>   }
>>
>> -static int acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>> +static void acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>>   {
>>          int i, count;
>>          struct acpi_processor_cx *cx;
>> @@ -822,11 +817,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>>          }
>>
>>          drv->state_count = count;
>> -
>> -       if (!count)
>> -               return -EINVAL;
>> -
>> -       return 0;
>>   }
>>
>>   static inline void acpi_processor_cstate_first_run_checks(void)
>> @@ -1248,7 +1238,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_states(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>>          if (pr->flags.has_lpi)
>>                  return acpi_processor_setup_lpi_states(pr);
>>
>> -       return acpi_processor_setup_cstates(pr);
>> +       acpi_processor_setup_cstates(pr);
>> +       return 0;
>>   }
>>
>>   /**
>> @@ -1268,7 +1259,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_dev(struct acpi_processor *pr,
>>          if (pr->flags.has_lpi)
>>                  return 0;
>>
>> -       return acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(pr, dev);
>> +       acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(pr, dev);
>> +       return 0;
>>   }
>>
>>   static int acpi_processor_get_power_info(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>> --
> Does this patch depend on the previous patches in the series?  If it
> doesn't, why don't you send it independently?
Good suggestion. Thanks, got it.
This patch doesn't depend on them.
But patch 6/7 and 7/7 depend on this patch and patch 3/7.
If they still need some times to discuss, I can send this patch first.
>
>

Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Remove useless codes about the verification of cstate count

Posted by Rafael J. Wysocki 1 month, 1 week ago

On Tue, Nov 4, 2025 at 11:03 AM lihuisong (C) <lihuisong@huawei.com> wrote:
>
>
> 在 2025/11/4 2:10, Rafael J. Wysocki 写道:
> > On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 9:42 AM Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com> wrote:
> >> The acpi_processor_setup_cstates and acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx will
> >> be called after successfully obtaining the power information. These setup
> >> functions have their own main role, but also verify the validity of cstate
> >> count.
> >>
> >> Actually, the acpi_processor_get_power_info_cst will return failure if the
> >> cstate count is zero and acpi_processor_get_power_info will return failure.
> >>
> >> So the verification of cstate count in these functions are useless.
> >>
> >> No intentional functional impact.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>
> >> ---
> >>   drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 22 +++++++---------------
> >>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
> >> index 4627b00257e6..1f332f02d273 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
> >> @@ -732,8 +732,8 @@ static int __cpuidle acpi_idle_enter_s2idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
> >>          return 0;
> >>   }
> >>
> >> -static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> >> -                                          struct cpuidle_device *dev)
> >> +static void acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> >> +                                           struct cpuidle_device *dev)
> >>   {
> >>          int i, count = ACPI_IDLE_STATE_START;
> >>          struct acpi_processor_cx *cx;
> >> @@ -753,14 +753,9 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> >>                  if (count == CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX)
> >>                          break;
> >>          }
> >> -
> >> -       if (!count)
> >> -               return -EINVAL;
> >> -
> >> -       return 0;
> >>   }
> >>
> >> -static int acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> >> +static void acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> >>   {
> >>          int i, count;
> >>          struct acpi_processor_cx *cx;
> >> @@ -822,11 +817,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cstates(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> >>          }
> >>
> >>          drv->state_count = count;
> >> -
> >> -       if (!count)
> >> -               return -EINVAL;
> >> -
> >> -       return 0;
> >>   }
> >>
> >>   static inline void acpi_processor_cstate_first_run_checks(void)
> >> @@ -1248,7 +1238,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_states(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> >>          if (pr->flags.has_lpi)
> >>                  return acpi_processor_setup_lpi_states(pr);
> >>
> >> -       return acpi_processor_setup_cstates(pr);
> >> +       acpi_processor_setup_cstates(pr);
> >> +       return 0;
> >>   }
> >>
> >>   /**
> >> @@ -1268,7 +1259,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_dev(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> >>          if (pr->flags.has_lpi)
> >>                  return 0;
> >>
> >> -       return acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(pr, dev);
> >> +       acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(pr, dev);
> >> +       return 0;
> >>   }
> >>
> >>   static int acpi_processor_get_power_info(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> >> --
> > Does this patch depend on the previous patches in the series?  If it
> > doesn't, why don't you send it independently?
> Good suggestion. Thanks, got it.
> This patch doesn't depend on them.
> But patch 6/7 and 7/7 depend on this patch and patch 3/7.
> If they still need some times to discuss, I can send this patch first.

Yes, please send it separately as I said.  The rest of the series can
be rebased on it.

[PATCH v2 1/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Mark the state as invalid if its entry method is illegal
[PATCH v2 2/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Mark the state as invalid when get lpi_state->arch_flags failed
[PATCH v2 3/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Relocate and verify acpi_processor_ffh_lpi_probe
[PATCH v2 4/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Disable ACPI idle if get power information failed in power notify
[PATCH v2 5/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Remove useless codes about the verification of cstate count
[PATCH v2 6/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Redefine setup idle functions to void
[PATCH v2 7/7] ACPI: processor: idle: Redefine acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_dev to void