Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:a0d1:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j17csp2108919pxa; Mon, 3 Aug 2020 07:42:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzPUgblHzNbP7Atun3+8UMubdpm6OdRXJmPNTeDwrS8RP7Ue/H2OZOjX2jO90QyeJLdCmUc X-Received: by 2002:a50:b941:: with SMTP id m59mr15531801ede.321.1596465761401; Mon, 03 Aug 2020 07:42:41 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1596465761; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=UR3ywMOHSuzk3tOeNM0E6FydV3OsnPh7CyljcXc+/JR8fDnT3BY05FXPkeoH4K41e8 EWHwpH7mFBDk6qguK8sBhoULz2M7Z5C2cEA8hAuoPoQ5IJrr5q9oES6ndKo7I61ZujYh N1Rr05EBW8k9E5Cz+6uK7BuSisQyOh60bUdV6C8DBbiBSG7Hku660Hqxo5uADyXFMEzQ ohTeHPwXVUZhCAYQFTT52KrRxhvEV5TFH9hBZStC/Z+T4SNGUmZE7ZVnhkfjEvIC+T3G Kgl0fzoLtYEkkh2sjbjIHAmb25vi1/quUOz6lMy7fJYaPwkvWN4M/L9SM8ixYPCw4feT 0irw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=tknX9eletcBtkKCLPnCUNutgMNdHlBv867AzZlJ9fR0=; b=wi9IScN1sgiZlflJ3FtN89V57vxZIB/untMQ6nvWfRqoQiaDaiA90lbi65rBkT98uu bEbhsrQp6dXcppzqCwT013bkzmc2PTfgfSepzx83lz1trFTzQu/Euq6yMT1IPz78Azc/ REeGHEMx5lq9F37Vffx7GI2kTP1fDZHKgptfnYSdVAS+00sk6Qym3HU/XWaFEieF9QmW LGzFA+jwjo6qq40HdwdqHbCoY1Fhztffn/6X/8PvfR0PU62pfpIw25m0p+Q7Li0+QHhI x4WzZ/5PE3YRu8khxvZBH4USSF3RMJZSUOMCGQ3qxhTR+w90wfezfaJFcUfvUbjGabKt xUcw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j14si10731663ejd.406.2020.08.03.07.42.19; Mon, 03 Aug 2020 07:42:41 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726805AbgHCOjr (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 3 Aug 2020 10:39:47 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:58496 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726358AbgHCOjq (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Aug 2020 10:39:46 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EF2B30E; Mon, 3 Aug 2020 07:39:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.1.198.53]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D37E63F718; Mon, 3 Aug 2020 07:39:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 15:39:44 +0100 From: Ionela Voinescu To: Sudeep Holla Cc: Dietmar Eggemann , Viresh Kumar , rjw@rjwysocki.net, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] arch_topology: disable frequency invariance for CONFIG_BL_SWITCHER Message-ID: <20200803143944.GA20312@arm.com> References: <20200722093732.14297-1-ionela.voinescu@arm.com> <20200722093732.14297-4-ionela.voinescu@arm.com> <20200730042423.4j22udejluis7blw@vireshk-mac-ubuntu> <1db4317a-0018-1590-f0ae-ed5e235b174f@arm.com> <20200731154838.GB14529@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200731154838.GB14529@bogus> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi guys, On Friday 31 Jul 2020 at 16:48:38 (+0100), Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 12:29:52PM +0200, Dietmar Eggemann wrote: > > [...] > > > > > Are there still any users of CONFIG_BL_SWITCHER? I guess it's only > > limited to A15/A7 systems w/ vexpress-spc-cpufreq.c ... so probably only > > TC2? > > I think so as no one shouted when I merged bL switcher driver into > vexpress-spc-cpufreq.c > I think a good indication is also the fact that frequency invariance was broken for a long time for bL_switcher_enabled systems and nobody shouted. A way to make this nicer is to fully remove BL_SWITCHER support. This support was valuable at its time, but given that now there is proper asymmetric CPU capacity support, is there any reason to hold on to this? Thanks, Ionela. > -- > Regards, > Sudeep