All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/3] arm64: topology: Make AMUs work with modular cpufreq drivers
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 16:33:36 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210108110336.udylbu6jkjc6mr55@vireshk-i7> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210108094416.GA19952@arm.com>

On 08-01-21, 09:44, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
> Now that I think of it again (after spending 30 minutes trying to come
> up with a more clear solution) I realised this is not actually a
> problem :).
> 
> The only location that checks the invariance status is schedutil, but
> what a cpufreq governor does becomes irrelevant if you remove the
> cpufreq driver.

Good catch :)

> The only potential problem is if one then inmods a
> cpufreq driver that's not invariant. But I think that might be on "if"
> too many to consider. What do you think?

Yeah, there is no need to worry about this then I think.

I will resend the patches soon.

-- 
viresh

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/3] arm64: topology: Make AMUs work with modular cpufreq drivers
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 16:33:36 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210108110336.udylbu6jkjc6mr55@vireshk-i7> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210108094416.GA19952@arm.com>

On 08-01-21, 09:44, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
> Now that I think of it again (after spending 30 minutes trying to come
> up with a more clear solution) I realised this is not actually a
> problem :).
> 
> The only location that checks the invariance status is schedutil, but
> what a cpufreq governor does becomes irrelevant if you remove the
> cpufreq driver.

Good catch :)

> The only potential problem is if one then inmods a
> cpufreq driver that's not invariant. But I think that might be on "if"
> too many to consider. What do you think?

Yeah, there is no need to worry about this then I think.

I will resend the patches soon.

-- 
viresh

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-01-08 11:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-12-15  5:34 [PATCH V3 1/3] arm64: topology: Avoid the have_policy check Viresh Kumar
2020-12-15  5:34 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-15  5:34 ` [PATCH V3 2/3] arm64: topology: Reorder init_amu_fie() a bit Viresh Kumar
2020-12-15  5:34   ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-15 11:53   ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-12-15 11:53     ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-12-15  5:34 ` [PATCH V3 3/3] arm64: topology: Make AMUs work with modular cpufreq drivers Viresh Kumar
2020-12-15  5:34   ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-15 11:56   ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-12-15 11:56     ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-12-16  0:03   ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-12-16  0:03     ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-12-16  4:38     ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-16  4:38       ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-16 19:37       ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-12-16 19:37         ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-12-17 10:50         ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-17 10:50           ` Viresh Kumar
2021-01-08  9:44           ` Ionela Voinescu
2021-01-08  9:44             ` Ionela Voinescu
2021-01-08 10:42             ` Ionela Voinescu
2021-01-08 10:42               ` Ionela Voinescu
2021-01-08 11:03             ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2021-01-08 11:03               ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-17  7:57 ` [PATCH V3 1/3] arm64: topology: Avoid the have_policy check Viresh Kumar
2020-12-17  7:57   ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-17 10:55   ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-17 10:55     ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-18  4:26     ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-18  4:26       ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-18 11:01       ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-18 11:01         ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-18 11:04         ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-18 11:04           ` Viresh Kumar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210108110336.udylbu6jkjc6mr55@vireshk-i7 \
    --to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.