[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121113162449.GE9327@x1.osrc.amd.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 17:24:49 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Mark Langsdorf <mark.langsdorf@...xeda.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6 v4] cpufreq: tolerate inexact values when collecting
stats
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:35:49AM -0600, Mark Langsdorf wrote:
> The function is buried pretty deep in the cpufreq_stat code. It didn't
> seem appropriate to make it a function pointer as part of struct
> cpufreq_driver.
Right, what's cpufreq-speak for
if (Calxeda)
shift by 10
?
Better yet, add a flag or a bitfield called "minimize_jitter" or similar
and set it only on your hardware...
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
--
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