On 28-07-17, 14:05, Saravana Kannan wrote: > 1. I'm not saying that. I'm saying assuming CPUs can change the freq only on > behalf of all the CPUs in the same policy is wrong. Again, the scheduler or > governor shouldn't even be making any of that assumption. That's a CPUfreq > driver problem. > > 2. No, that is not the basis of the entire cpufreq core design. None of the > existing CPUfreq code has any assumptions that only CPUs in a policy can > change their frequency. It doesn't break in any way in system where any CPU > can change any other CPU's frequency -- all Qualcomm chips are like that. > It's only the recent scheduler notifier changes that are adding this > additional limitation and breaking stuff for systems where any CPU can > change any other CPU's frequency.
Can you please have a look at V5 and see f the solution proposed there would be fine ? -- viresh
