[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0iqYHNt6NQy3Fi1B=XtjNOm2x0mX3+7eWBREgFZRpUS+w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 12:06:08 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@...il.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>,
Erik Schmauss <erik.schmauss@...el.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Javi Merino <javi.merino@...nel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
"open list:ACPI COMPONENT ARCHITECTURE (ACPICA)" <devel@...ica.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:FRAMEBUFFER LAYER" <linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] cpufreq: Migrate users of policy notifiers to QoS requests
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 11:49 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Now that cpufreq core supports taking QoS requests for min/max cpu
> frequencies, lets migrate rest of the users to using them instead of the
> policy notifiers.
Technically, this still is linux-next only. :-)
> The CPUFREQ_NOTIFY and CPUFREQ_ADJUST events of the policy notifiers are
> removed as a result, but we have to add CPUFREQ_CREATE_POLICY and
> CPUFREQ_REMOVE_POLICY events to it for the acpi stuff specifically. So
> the policy notifiers aren't completely removed.
That's not entirely accurate, because arch_topology is going to use
CPUFREQ_CREATE_POLICY now too.
> Boot tested on my x86 PC and ARM hikey board. Nothing looked broken :)
>
> This has already gone through build bot for a few days now.
So I'd prefer patches [5-8] to go right after the first one and then
do the cleanups on top of that, as somebody may want to backport the
essential changes without the cleanups.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists