[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180222085936.GA2290@e108498-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 09:04:04 +0000
From: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc: ALKML <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Alexey Klimov <klimov.linux@...il.com>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 19/20] cpufreq: add support for CPU DVFS based on SCMI
message protocol
Hi Sudeep,
On Monday 12 Feb 2018 at 18:45:23 (+0000), Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
> +/*
> + * perf_ops->freq_set is not a synchronous, the actual OPP change will
> + * happen asynchronously and can get notified if the events are
> + * subscribed for by the SCMI firmware
> + */
> +static int
> +scmi_cpufreq_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index)
> +{
> + struct scmi_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
> + struct scmi_perf_ops *perf_ops = handle->perf_ops;
> + u64 freq = policy->freq_table[index].frequency * 1000;
> +
> + return perf_ops->freq_set(handle, priv->domain_id, freq, false);
> +}
Is arch_set_freq_scale() needed in this function ?
Thanks,
Quentin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists