On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 09:06:26PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 2 June 2016 at 20:29, Javi Merino <javi.mer...@arm.com> wrote:
> > In 5a31d594a973 ("cpufreq: Allow freq_table to be obtained for offline
> > CPUs") you did the opposite: don't use cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() because
> > it won't give you the policy of a cpu that is offline. Now you are
> > arguing that we should go back to cpufreq_cpu_get() which implicitly
> > calls cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(). Won't we hit the same issue that
> > 5a31d594a973 was trying to prevent: that we can't get a freq_table for
> > a cpu that is offline?
>
> Yes, that should be fixed. Thanks for letting me know about it :)
Ok, that was my only nit. Other than that, it looks good to me. For
cpu_cooling.c
Acked-by: Javi Merino <javi.mer...@arm.com>
