From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1750969AbcBEDW1 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 4 Feb 2016 22:22:27 -0500
Received: from mail-pa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.220.51]:36465 "EHLO
	mail-pa0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750722AbcBEDW0 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 4 Feb 2016 22:22:26 -0500
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 08:52:22 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
        Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org>,
        Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/11] cpufreq: governor: Use common mutex for dbs_data
 protection
Message-ID: <20160205032222.GB21792@vireshk>
References: <3705929.bslqXH980s@vostro.rjw.lan>
 <1529283.0IedZktI9q@vostro.rjw.lan>
 <20160204050954.GU3469@vireshk>
 <CAJZ5v0hWj4JgCh76Fg48ex3Svv7BUHR=9+RoA728R9aYU+12Pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160205025948.GE3068@vireshk>
 <CAJZ5v0iyJSuWkqrL8VuSbX8G5s2X+fYngQqi+eVrfVMkLrkmeA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0iyJSuWkqrL8VuSbX8G5s2X+fYngQqi+eVrfVMkLrkmeA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 05-02-16, 04:06, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> And why is this a big problem, actually?  Why do we want the switching
> of governors to be that efficient?

I am not saying its a big problem, just that its kind of a big lock,
which could have been finer.

-- 
viresh