[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160802013649.GD9332@graphite.smuckle.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 18:36:49 -0700
From: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] cpufreq / sched: Add flags argument to
cpufreq_update_util()
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 01:44:41AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, August 01, 2016 12:59:30 PM Steve Muckle wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 04:57:18PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, August 01, 2016 09:33:12 AM Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 01:36:46AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > +#define UUF_RT 0x01
> > > >
> > > > What does UUF stand for?
> > >
> > > "Utilization upadte flag".
> >
> > I had wondered the same - in my patchset I used CPUFREQ_SCHED_UPDATE_* for the
> > prefixes, though I guess some may object to the length.
>
> Well, OK.
>
> I guess something like SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT etc would be sufficient?
Yeah I think that would work.
thanks,
Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists