[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160203022920.GN31828@vireshk>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 07:59:20 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
dietmar.eggemann@....com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] cpufreq: governor: Kill
declare_show_sampling_rate_min()
On 02-02-16, 21:23, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> To me, this is not about the macro, but about moving min_sampling_rate
> to governor tunables, so my subject would be something like "cpufreq:
> governor: Treat min_sampling_rate as a governor-specific tunable".
>
> My changelog, then, would be something like the following:
>
> "The min_sampling_rate governor tunable is a field in struct dbs_data,
> so it has to be handled in a special way separate from the rest of
> governor tunables. In particular, that requires a special macro to be
> present for creating its show/store sysfs attribute callbacks.
>
> However, there is no real need for the data structures and code in
> question to be arranged this way and if min_sampling_rate is moved to
> data structures holding the other governor tunables, the sysfs
> attribute creation macros that work with those tunables will also work
> with min_sampling_rate and the special macro for it won't be necessary
> any more. That will make it easier to modify the governor code going
> forward, so do it."
I just copy pasted it with:
[ Rafael: Written changelog ]
just before my sign-off. Thanks.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists