Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Set CPUFREQ_ASYNC_NOTIFICATION for drivers handling notification

[Srivatsa S. Bhat]

On 04/25/2014 01:22 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> CPUFREQ_ASYNC_NOTIFICATION was initially designed for drivers which don't want
> core to send notifications for them as they wouldn't finish frequency
> transitions in ->target_index().
>

And let's keep it that way. Overloading ASYNC_NOTIFICATION with other meanings
is a bad idea.
 
> But there were other kinds of drivers as well who don't have straight forward
> implementations of ->target_index() routines and wanted to handle notifications
> themselves.
> 

Looking at longhaul, powernow-k6 and powernow-k7, I think we can safely remove
the extra notifications from them and let them depend on the cpufreq core's set
of notifications. The patchset I posted just now uses that design.

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/