On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > So all my patches are contained in two series. The first one is: > > [PATCH V3 0/8] cpufreq: cleanups and reorganization > > which I have sent this morning. It does some cleanup and shall be > applied regardless of this series. > > This series improves the performance of cpufreq_frequency_table_target() > routine by storing the policy->freq_table sorted in ascending order. On > one hand it shall improve the performance of current governors for > drivers providing freq-table to cpufreq core and on another hand this > API can be used directly from schedutil governor as well. > > As Steve has requested earlier, these APIs are moved to a .h file to > avoid function calls. > > Steve's series can use this API now without any performance lag. > > The first 7 patches makes sure that current drivers wouldn't break because > of reordering of policy->freq_table and the 8th patch updates cpufreq > core to sort policy->freq_table and make > cpufreq_frequency_table_target() much more efficient.
Is there any particular reason why patches [2-7/9] are separate? They seem to be making analogous changes in several drivers (and even the changelog seems to be the same), so why don't you make a single patch out of them?
