[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151130133526.GD4899@ubuntu>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 19:05:26 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] cpufreq: governor: replace per-cpu delayed work with
timers
On 30-11-15, 13:05, Lucas Stach wrote:
> I don't want to block this patch on that, but maybe as a thought for
> further consideration: Wouldn't it make sense to use a single unbound
> deferrable work item for this? There was some work to make this possible
> already: "timer: make deferrable cpu unbound timers really not bound to
> a cpu"
Yes, it would be sensible but that work has gone nowhere since April.
Once that is merged, we can think about 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists