[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160211173837.GQ6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 18:38:37 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpufreq: Replace timers with utilization update
callbacks
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 06:34:05PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> I've updated the patch in the meantime
> (https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8283431/).
>
> Should I move the RT/DL hooks to task_tick_rt/dl(), respectively?
Probably, this really is about kicking cpufreq to do something, right?
update_curr_*() seems overkill for that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists