From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Antti P Miettinen Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] RFC: CPU frequency min/max as PM QoS params Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 10:15:03 +0200 Message-ID: <87ehuxqveg.fsf@amiettinen-lnx.nvidia.com> References: <1326697201-32406-1-git-send-email-amiettinen@nvidia.com> <201201162238.57556.rjw@sisk.pl> <20120118031319.GB27153@mgross-G62> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org mark gross writes: > I'm not a big fan of the cpufreq seamanly redundant export either. > Doesn't the equivalent data get exported under > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu?/cpufreq/ ? The added sysfs nodes are under /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu?/cpufreq. They do no not duplicate functionality, they are just an addition. Currently you can request a new minimum by writing to scaling_min_freq and you can view the currently enforced policy->min via the same file. Patch 3 adds read-only policy_{min,max}_freq nodes for being able to inspect the user_policy.min/max. This is related to patch 4 which preserves the requested min/max in user_policy instead of storing the enforced min/max to user_policy. This is in turn related to patch 5. We need to be able to revert back to requested min/max when PM QoS constraints get lifted. I think we do not want to overwrite user_policy min/max with policy->min/max as those values can be affected by temporary constraints. I would welcome more comments on patches 3 and 4. --Antti