linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] ARM: Exynos: switch to using generic cpufreq driver for Exynos4x12

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150803104044.GB21529@linux>
Date:	Mon, 3 Aug 2015 16:10:44 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
Cc:	Thomas Abraham <thomas.ab@...sung.com>,
	Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
	Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
	Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@...hile0.org>,
	Tobias Jakobi <tjakobi@...h.uni-bielefeld.de>,
	Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
	Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] ARM: Exynos: switch to using generic cpufreq
 driver for Exynos4x12

On 03-08-15, 12:36, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> I would really like it to be dependency not an option (+ I think
> that ideally it should be checked at runtime, IOW we should be
> checking from cpufreq-dt driver if the thermal support is enabled
> before enabling boost support).

I don't think boost has any dependency on thermal support. Yeah, it
may be true for your platform but we can't force it. People might have
different algorithms to control boost modes, thermal is just one
option they may look at. For few, enabling boost may not be a thermal
issue, but power. So, they want to allow it only when they want, but
that wouldn't burn their chip.

So, a platform can choose how it wants to have it. :)

-- 
viresh
--
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/