Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758491Ab3GZLCh (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jul 2013 07:02:37 -0400 Received: from mail-oa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.219.47]:44999 "EHLO mail-oa0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756819Ab3GZLCf (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jul 2013 07:02:35 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20130726125827.72f9ef18@amdc308.digital.local> References: <1370502472-7249-1-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com> <1374770011-22171-1-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com> <1374770011-22171-2-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com> <20130726125827.72f9ef18@amdc308.digital.local> Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 16:32:34 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/8] cpufreq: Store cpufreq policies in a list From: Viresh Kumar To: Lukasz Majewski Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Zhang Rui , Eduardo Valentin , "cpufreq@vger.kernel.org" , Linux PM list , Jonghwa Lee , Lukasz Majewski , linux-kernel , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Daniel Lezcano , Kukjin Kim , durgadoss.r@intel.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1518 Lines: 43 On 26 July 2013 16:28, Lukasz Majewski wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 15:44:29 +0530 Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org > wrote, >> On 25 July 2013 22:03, Lukasz Majewski wrote: >> Looks good but would have been better if you could have moved >> existing code to use this infrastructure.. >> >> For example, this code in __cpufreq_add_dev() >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU >> /* Check if this cpu was hot-unplugged earlier and has >> siblings */ read_lock_irqsave(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags); >> for_each_online_cpu(sibling) { >> >> --- >> >> } >> read_unlock_irqrestore(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags); >> #endif > > Do you mean to write something like: > > #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW > write_lock_irqsave(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags); > list_add(&policy->policy_list, &cpufreq_policy_list); > write_unlock_irqrestore(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags); > #endif > > Or Am I missing something? I can't imaging how you though I am saying this :) The code I mentioned actually requires to iterate through the list of available policies but was iterating over all online cpus.. And so your new infrastructure or this list can be used instead of looping for all cpus. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/