On 12 August 2013 14:37, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> Do you have any second thoughts about this? Shall I leave it as it is
> now?
Honestly speaking I didn't had a chance to look into this..
Leave it as is, in case there is some problem we can patch it later.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send th
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 15:06:45 +0530 Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org
wrote,
> On 26 July 2013 14:03, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > The problem here is with the cpufreq_driver->set_boost() call.
> >
> > I tried to avoid acquiring lock at one function and release it at
> > another (in this case cpuf
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 14:36:08 +0200 Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote,
> On Friday, July 26, 2013 10:33:21 AM Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:47:15 +0530 Viresh Kumar wrote,
> > > On 25 July 2013 22:03, Lukasz Majewski
> > > wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
On Friday, July 26, 2013 10:33:21 AM Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:47:15 +0530 Viresh Kumar wrote,
> > On 25 July 2013 22:03, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> >
> > > /*
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 15:06:45 +0530 Viresh Kumar wrote,
> On 26 July 2013 14:03, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > The problem here is with the cpufreq_driver->set_boost() call.
> >
> > I tried to avoid acquiring lock at one function and release it at
> > another (in this case cpufreq_boost_set_sw), espec
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 15:03:34 +0530 Viresh Kumar wrote,
> On 26 July 2013 14:03, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:47:15 +0530 Viresh Kumar wrote,
> >> On 25 July 2013 22:03, Lukasz Majewski
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > +int cpufreq_boost_trigger_state(int state)
> >> > +{
> >> > +
On 26 July 2013 14:03, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> The problem here is with the cpufreq_driver->set_boost() call.
>
> I tried to avoid acquiring lock at one function and release it at
> another (in this case cpufreq_boost_set_sw), especially since the
> __cpufreq_governor() acquires its own lock - go
On 26 July 2013 14:03, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:47:15 +0530 Viresh Kumar wrote,
>> On 25 July 2013 22:03, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
>> > +int cpufreq_boost_trigger_state(int state)
>> > +{
>> > + unsigned long flags;
>> > + int ret = 0;
>> > +
>> > + if (cpu
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:47:15 +0530 Viresh Kumar wrote,
> On 25 July 2013 22:03, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>
> > /*
> > + *
> > BOOST
On 25 July 2013 22:03, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> /*
> + * BOOST *
> + ***
This commit adds boost frequency support in cpufreq core (Hardware &
Software). Some SoCs (like Exynos4 - e.g. 4x12) allow setting frequency
above its normal operation limits. Such mode shall be only used for a
short time.
Overclocking (boost) support is essentially provided by platform
dependent
11 matches
Mail list logo
