lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [TEGRA194_CPUFREQ Patch 2/3] cpufreq: Add Tegra194 cpufreq driver
From
Date


On 16/04/20 9:07 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On 15-04-20, 16:55, Sumit Gupta wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 14/04/20 11:15 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>>>
>>>
>>> On 13-04-20, 17:50, Sumit Gupta wrote:
>>>> This was done considering long delay value as explained previously.
>>>> Do you think that smp_call_function_single() would be better than work queue
>>>> here?
>>>
>>> Don't work with assumptions, you should test both and see which one
>>> works better. Workqueue should never be faster than
>>> smp_call_function_single() with my understanding.
>> Checked the time taken and its almost same in both cases.
>> Earlier we used smp_call_function_single(), but delay time period was small
>> in that SOC. In T194, the time period was more. So, this is an optimization
>> done because using work queue has advantage as interrupts will not be
>> disabled for that period.
>
> Hmm, okay, keep the workqueue and mention the required details in a
> comment for everyone to understand why the implementation is done that
> way.
>

sure, thank you!

> --
> viresh
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-04-16 09:06    [W:0.055 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site