[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170322142116.qpe2faqwbmlmhft7@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 15:21:16 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Always trace frequency if it does
not change
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 01:52:04PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > So why not fix the tools?
>
> Because I can't.
>
> I just can't go and fix all of the tools binaries that people use out
> there and I want them to use recent kernels at the same time.
>
Thing is; you're now letting random tracepoint user dictate kernel
implementation. That's a bad state to be in.
(and why I hate tracepoint to begin with)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists