lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Aug]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/8] cpufreq: Auto-register with energy model
On 11-08-21, 10:48, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 10-08-21, 13:35, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > This series adds more code than it removes,
>
> Sadly yes :(
>
> > and the unregistration is
> > not a fix as we don't ever remove the EM tables by design, so not sure
> > either of these points are valid arguments.
>
> I think that design needs to be looked over again, it looks broken to
> me everytime I land onto this code. I wonder why we don't unregister
> stuff.

Coming back to this series. We have two options, based on what I
proposed here:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20210811050327.3yxrk4kqxjjwaztx@vireshk-i7/

1. Let cpufreq core register with EM on behalf of cpufreq drivers.

2. Update drivers to use ->ready() callback to do this stuff.

I am fine with both :)

--
viresh

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-08-11 07:34    [W:0.070 / U:0.276 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site