From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18999CA9ECB for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 05:44:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D69102082C for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 05:44:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="Yih8JGSY" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729683AbfJRFok (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Oct 2019 01:44:40 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f194.google.com ([209.85.215.194]:41991 "EHLO mail-pg1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390035AbfJRFoh (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Oct 2019 01:44:37 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f194.google.com with SMTP id f14so2702878pgi.9 for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 22:44:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Ahk63OI60utYOmx1X43UEwxnHBgJgQRBxI72JSyLR2Y=; b=Yih8JGSYgB3U/98qQiRBg5zdD9tqp45DIfKnIw4wj+YWNqUEsx/KGFXvTg+Vl4DGKZ cSSHhesE6odKblyh1TLucrLIVRtJbb5tOy5DK5Nt+IDpje8runTFOoCipgNdB7ZmeE4D KWBD3wCwXfjs2T2sPT9WVho7xE0n+1Oofp1LBaWB6n27TY/DLzwzvyMRx5t1iVkmzT8T M38Hb3tkzKxuKkBetK5urEZcTtwTZTnENPa/C1XQZaX5ODrAgfePjocq1+g+3uRawaEu 70t52KnSuT9XTx43xt4CowesMZxHdxMs4FrUxqI41eGdwyXLKY6wtksvSsfcFYlQzWW/ ALQA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Ahk63OI60utYOmx1X43UEwxnHBgJgQRBxI72JSyLR2Y=; b=m9eqavKp3LEKWylSRm/dzHgjLphDZIe3jBmiztRJzL+HF12mCsIJvRVqjLya3jX/CS kTRePmf8uV3jOvnIyHwD0XMAJ/dSUD63ovUXBlL5tb+84SqoRjd6LYv8wjdfYwGKfzSY EjCHQ2AtrXFY4J8aA/gCuHnkgoszh3Fwcz8inqm9/juFYTn7BRiCwAs/ovfXVPGrkyDc 7PFrJc7LxpUksGK+RvZ3D9V84sFgEoX/Q62qr8ARMnBD/lEd19HXlIJLgscYNh2Y+Dx2 r4mwvbRHdj/Bp8oCw7P2I16W2D+UbvXlL/4tdiuqzCvRJgpWaSPTREOTpv2vLsz9m371 rFZw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWca5NbXKH8MY1zBZ9HA2R1c14GlXO9yqVpVzK9EjE+nOXxKJRw 7abYRMxz6GF04+V4E5wjKB4flw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx+utmT/iqde3kt4kJ4rpoCw1TX48diX3ulQSDJ78ELdDEU/bI/wfkzp2s2DFsHtT8FP6pNlA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:3853:: with SMTP id h19mr4808623pgn.55.1571377476416; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 22:44:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([122.172.151.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f185sm5546751pfb.183.2019.10.17.22.44.35 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 17 Oct 2019 22:44:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 11:14:33 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Sudeep Holla , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux PM , Linux ACPI , LKML , Dmitry Osipenko Subject: Re: [RFT][PATCH 0/3] cpufreq / PM: QoS: Introduce frequency QoS and use it in cpufreq Message-ID: <20191018054433.tq2euue675xk4o63@vireshk-i7> References: <2811202.iOFZ6YHztY@kreacher> <20191016142343.GB5330@bogus> <20191017095725.izchzl7enfylvpf3@vireshk-i7> <20191017095942.GF8978@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52 Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On 17-10-19, 18:34, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > [BTW, Viresh, it looks like cpufreq_set_policy() should still ensure > that the new min is less than the new max, because the QoS doesn't do > that.] The ->verify() callback does that for us I believe. -- viresh