[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130118170755.GB4062@pd.tnic>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:07:55 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc: "Gopalakrishnan, Aravind" <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@....com>,
"rjw@...k.pl" <rjw@...k.pl>, Andre Przywara <andre@...rep.de>,
"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andreas <linuxuser330250@....net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/cpufreq: Warn user when powernow-k8 tries to
fall back to acpi-cpufreq and it is unavailable.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 04:23:47PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:54:37PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> > So, handoff to acpi-cpufreq still has some issues. When both are
> > built-in, the module_init functions turn into normal initcalls and
> > in that case, they're executed in link order and it can happen that
> > powernowk8_init() runs before acpi_cpufreq_init().
>
> Just flip the link order? It's only the way it is because in the past we
> wanted to try hardware-specific drivers before more generic ones, and I
> don't think that's a concern in this case now.
Yeah, I heard that the acpi-idle and intel-idle drivers do that and also
heard that it was a hack. It doesn't look too ugly IMHO:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=2671717265ae6e720a9ba5f13fbec3a718983b65
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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