2013/8/16 Viresh Kumar :
> On 16 August 2013 13:24, Lan Tianyu wrote:
>> Sorry for misoperation.
>
> No Problem...
>
>> One concern. Target() callback may return before changing
>> cpufreq actually due to some check failures. After this change, prechange
>> event will be triggered when these check failures take place. I am not sure
>> whether this should be took into account.
>
> Yes, if you see the first patch of this series, it takes this into
> account.. In case
> target() failed and returned an error, we simply notify the POST CHANGE
> notification with old frequencies instead of new ones. I believe that would be
> enough..
Yes, I have seen it but I missed the following two patches because they
are not in the linux-pm tree. You moved the cpufreq_frequency_table_target()
to cpufreq core and before notifying PRE CHANGE notification. The major
check has been done. Now I think it's ok. Thanks for explanation.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/cpufreq/msg06970.html
http://www.spinics.net/lists/cpufreq/msg06896.html
Reviewed-by: Lan Tianyu
>
> This is exactly what acpi-cpufreq and others are doing currently.
>
> Hope I answered your question well?
>
> --
> viresh
--
Best regards
Tianyu Lan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
