[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160322031436.GR27778@vireshk-i7>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 08:44:36 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cpufreq: Introduce cpufreq_start_governor()
On 21-03-16, 15:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
>
> Starting a governor in cpufreq always follows the same pattern
> involving two calls to cpufreq_governor(), one with the event
> argument set to CPUFREQ_GOV_START and one with that argument set to
> CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS.
>
> Introduce cpufreq_start_governor() that will carry out those two
> operations and make all places where governors are started use it.
>
> That slightly modifies the behavior of cpufreq_set_policy() which
> now also will go back to the old governor if the second call to
> cpufreq_governor() (the one with event equal to CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS)
> fails, but that really is how it should work in the first place.
>
> Also cpufreq_resume() will now pring an error message if the
> CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS call to cpufreq_governor() fails, but that
> makes it follow cpufreq_add_policy_cpu() and cpufreq_offline()
> in that respect.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists