[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210810100652.h473q6hgtc5czfyk@vireshk-i7>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 15:36:52 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@....com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] cpufreq: vexpress: Use auto-registration for energy
model
On 10-08-21, 11:05, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> I can see that this driver calls explicitly the
> of_cpufreq_cooling_register()
> It does this in the cpufreq_driver->ready() callback
> implementation: ve_spc_cpufreq_ready()
>
> With that in mind, the new code in the patch 1/8, which
> registers the EM, should be called even earlier, above:
> ---------------------8<---------------------------------
> /* Callback for handling stuff after policy is ready */
> if (cpufreq_driver->ready)
> cpufreq_driver->ready(policy);
> ------------------->8----------------------------------
Thanks. I will look at this sequencing issue again.
> This also triggered a question:
> If this new flag can be set in the cpufreq driver which hasn't set
> CPUFREQ_IS_COOLING_DEV
> ?
Why not ?
> I can only see one driver (this one in the patch) which has such
> configuration.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists