On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 02:18:54AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > My thinking was that one of these two would be preferable: > > > > - Forcing ->target() drivers to install a ->resolve_freq callback, > > enforcing this at cpufreq driver init time. > > That would have been possible, but your series didn't do that. > > > My understanding is > > ->target() drivers are deprecated anyway > > No, they aren't.
Ok. I didn't follow Documentation/cpu-freq/cpu-drivers.txt section 1.5 then - it suggests something about target() is deprecated, perhaps it's out of date. > There simply are cases in which frequency tables are not workable > (like the ACPI CPPC one). Sure that makes sense. > > and theren't aren't many of > > them, though I don't know offhand exactly how many or how hard it > > would be to do for each one. > > > > - Forcing callers (schedutil in this case) to check that either > > ->target() or ->resolve_freq() is implemented. It means > > catching and scrutinizing future callers of resolve_freq. > > But that doesn't reduce the number of checks in cpufreq_driver_resolve_freq(). > > There still are three choices in there: return a frequency from the > table (if present), or call ->resolve_freq (if implemented), or return > target_freq (as the last resort). Sorry, that should've been "check that either ->target_index() or ->resolve_freq() is implemented." Implementing resolve_freq for the target() drivers and requiring it at driver init time is probably the better way to go though. Perhaps I can work on this at some point.
