cpuidle: rename function name "__cpuidle_register_driver", v2

The function __cpuidle_register_driver name is confusing because it
suggests, conforming to the coding style of the kernel, it registers
the driver without taking a lock. Actually, it just fill the different
power field states with a decresing value if the power has not been
specified.

Clarify the purpose of the function by changing its name and
move the condition out of this function.

This patch fix nothing and does not change the behavior of the
function. It is just for the sake of clarity.

IHMO, reading in the code:

+       if (!drv->power_specified)
+               set_power_states(drv);

is much more explicit than:

-       __cpuidle_register_driver(drv);
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>

drivers/cpuidle/driver.c

@@ -18,9 +18,10 @@ static struct cpuidle_driver *cpuidle_curr_driver;
 DEFINE_SPINLOCK(cpuidle_driver_lock);
 int cpuidle_driver_refcount;
 
-static void __cpuidle_register_driver(struct cpuidle_driver *drv)
+static void set_power_states(struct cpuidle_driver *drv)
 {
 	int i;
+
 	/*
 	 * cpuidle driver should set the drv->power_specified bit
 	 * before registering if the driver provides
@@ -35,10 +36,8 @@ static void __cpuidle_register_driver(struct cpuidle_driver *drv)
 	 * an power value of -1.  So we use -2, -3, etc, for other
 	 * c-states.
 	 */
-	if (!drv->power_specified) {
-		for (i = CPUIDLE_DRIVER_STATE_START; i < drv->state_count; i++)
-			drv->states[i].power_usage = -1 - i;
-	}
+	for (i = CPUIDLE_DRIVER_STATE_START; i < drv->state_count; i++)
+		drv->states[i].power_usage = -1 - i;
 }
 
 /**
@@ -58,8 +57,12 @@ int cpuidle_register_driver(struct cpuidle_driver *drv)
 		spin_unlock(&cpuidle_driver_lock);
 		return -EBUSY;
 	}
-	__cpuidle_register_driver(drv);
+
+	if (!drv->power_specified)
+		set_power_states(drv);
+
 	cpuidle_curr_driver = drv;
+
 	spin_unlock(&cpuidle_driver_lock);
 
 	return 0;