On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 01:08:28PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Not really pretty though. It blows a bit that you require this callback > > to be periodic (in order to replace a timer). > > We need it for now, but that's because of how things work on the cpufreq side.
Right, maybe stick a big comment on cpufreq_trigger_update() noting its a big ugly hack and will go away 'soon'. > The last version is here: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8275271/ > > but it has the additional hooks for RT/DL which you seem to be > thinking are a mistake. As long as we make sure everbody knows they're a band-aid and will be taken out back and shot that should be fine for a little while I suppose.
