[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKohpon8iRUiPHJqyLSweqGhAjaZBn2f6TQk+Ow0-DvHofHt1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 15:55:26 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocky" <rjw@...k.pl>,
"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Jonghwa Lee <jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com>,
Myungjoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...ess.pl>,
Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@...aro.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Eduardo Valentin <eduardo.valentin@...com>, t.figa@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/7] cpufreq: Add boost frequency support in core
On 27 June 2013 15:18, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 14:32:57 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> I thought about this idea, but at cpufreq_boost_trigger_state_sw()
> I iterate through all available policies and call
> cpufreq_frequency_table_cpuinfo()[*] on them. In this routine [*] I use
> cpufreq_boost_enabled() [**] route to search for maximal (boost)
> frequency.
> The [**] reads boost_enabled flag, which shall be updated before. When
> this search fails, then I restore the old value of boost_enabled.
Ok.
>> >> > + else
>> >> > + ret = cpufreq_boost_trigger_state_sw();
>>
>> then why not enable_boost_sw() here? that would be more
>> relevant.
>
> Could you be more specific here?
I meant rename cpufreq_boost_trigger_state_sw() to
enable_boost_sw() :)
--
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