From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Hilman Subject: Re: [PM-WIP_CPUFREQ][PATCH 0/6 V3] Cleanups for cpufreq Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 11:10:27 -0700 Message-ID: <87ipsxcoz0.fsf@ti.com> References: <1306366733-8439-1-git-send-email-nm@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from na3sys009aog115.obsmtp.com ([74.125.149.238]:38210 "EHLO na3sys009aog115.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758143Ab1EZSKb (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2011 14:10:31 -0400 Received: by mail-pz0-f52.google.com with SMTP id 35so617570pzk.39 for ; Thu, 26 May 2011 11:10:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1306366733-8439-1-git-send-email-nm@ti.com> (Nishanth Menon's message of "Wed, 25 May 2011 16:38:45 -0700") Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Nishanth Menon Cc: linux-omap So here's a dumb question, being rather ignorant of CPUfreq on SMP. Should we be running a CPUfreq instance on both CPUs when they cannot be scaled independently? What is being scaled here is actually the cluster (the MPU SS via dpll_mpu_ck), not an individual CPU. So to me, it only makes sense to have a an instance of the driver per scalable device, which in this case is a single MPU SS. What am I missing? Kevin