[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2015 03:06:39 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
preeti.lkml@...il.com, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/9] cpufreq: ondemand: only queue canceled works from update_sampling_rate()
On Tuesday, September 08, 2015 07:28:31 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 08-09-15, 03:11, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > There really are two cases, either you pass a CPU or gov_queue_work() has to
> > walk policy->cpus.
>
> Right (At least for now, we are doing just that.)
>
> > Doing it the way you did hides that IMO.
>
> Maybe. But I see it otherwise. Adding special meaning to a variable
> (like int cpu == -1 being the special case to specify policy->cpus)
> hides things morei, as we need to look at how it is decoded finally in
> the routine gov_queue_work().
Oh well.
I've just realized that if you combined this patch with the [6/9],
you wouldn't need to make any changes to gov_queue_work() at all,
because that patch removes the case in point entirely.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists