[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250722032727.zmdwj6ztitkmr4pf@vireshk-i7>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 08:57:27 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Prashant Malani <pmalani@...gle.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@....com>,
Jie Zhan <zhanjie9@...ilicon.com>,
Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:CPU FREQUENCY SCALING FRAMEWORK" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
z00813676 <zhenglifeng1@...wei.com>, sudeep.holla@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] cpufreq: CPPC: Dont read counters for idle CPUs
On 21-07-25, 12:40, Prashant Malani wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2025 at 10:00, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
> > Why don't you flag the driver as CPUFREQ_NEED_UPDATE_LIMITS?
> >
> > That would kind of make sense given how the driver works overall, or
> > am I missing anything?
+1
> Sounds fine to me (it doesn't fix the lingering accuracy issue, but at
> least frequency
> setting will get unblocked). I can put together a patch if there are
> no objections.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists