Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:09:44 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] cpufreq: provide data for frequency-invariant
 load-tracking support
Message-ID: <20170711063944.GA17115@vireshk-i7>
References: <20170706094948.8779-1-dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
 <12829054.TWIodSo4bb@aspire.rjw.lan>
 <20170710065443.GG2928@vireshk-i7>
 <4673356.gkeX7KYvlb@aspire.rjw.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4673356.gkeX7KYvlb@aspire.rjw.lan>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 529
Lines: 15

On 10-07-17, 14:46, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This particular change is about a new feature, so making it in the core is OK
> in two cases IMO: (a) when you actively want everyone to be affected by it and

IMO this change should be done for the whole ARM architecture. And if some
regression happens due to this, then we come back and solve it.

> (b) when the effect of it on the old systems should not be noticeable.

I am not sure about the effects of this on performance really.

@Dietmar: Any inputs for that ?

-- 
viresh