Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add P state driver for Intel Core Processors

From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Thu Feb 14 2013 - 07:15:11 EST

On Thursday, February 14, 2013 09:38:21 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Dirk Brandewie
> <dirk.brandewie@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > For the case where both are built-in the load order works my driver uses
> > device_initcall() and acpi_cpufreq uses late_initcall().
> >
> > For the case where both are a module (which I was sure I tested) you are
> > right
> > I will have to do something.
> >
> > For now I propose to make my driver built-in only while I sort out the right
> > solution for the module build. Does this seem reasonable to everyone?
> Of-course i am missing something here. Why would anybody want to insert
> acpi-cpufreq module when the system supports the pstate driver.
> In case they are mutually exclusive, then we can have something like
> depends on !ACPI-DRIVER in the kconfig option of pstate driver.

Yes. Or the other way around (i.e. make acpi_cpufreq depend on


I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at