[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOqmu82rYWomE6n=vEFk97tiS0Da4mZSFdvO5zVbApRAoS2LNA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 11:40:57 +0530
From: Inderpal Singh <inderpal.s@...sung.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
"[Chander Kashyap" <chander.kashyap@...aro.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Chander Kashyap <k.chander@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: discard duplicate OPP additions
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> On 15 May 2014 11:16, Inderpal Singh <inderpal.s@...sung.com> wrote:
>> I think I did not make myself clear.
>
> Probably I was the one who got confused :)
>
>> Devfreq will have its own opp table associated with its own device. It
>> does not uses the opp table of cpus.
>> Hence there may be need to free the table if driver (at least devfreq)
>> getting un-registered.
>
> We may have an unregister routine routine, I am not arguing about that.
> But we don't need to call that for CPU's opp, that's it.. For devices it might
> make sense to free memory.
Yes the provision should be there in the OPP framework and let the
individual drivers decide whether to invoke or not.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
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