From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757736Ab3HMNqE (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Aug 2013 09:46:04 -0400 Received: from mail-oa0-f42.google.com ([209.85.219.42]:52365 "EHLO mail-oa0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756770Ab3HMNqB (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Aug 2013 09:46:01 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 19:16:00 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 00/35] CPUFreq: Implement light weight ->target(): for 3.13 From: Viresh Kumar To: rjw@sisk.pl, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Viresh Kumar , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov , Eric Miao , Hans-Christian Egtvedt , Jesper Nilsson , John Crispin , Kukjin Kim , Linus Walleij , linux-cris-kernel@axis.com, Mikael Starvik , Santosh Shilimkar , Sekhar Nori , Shawn Guo , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Warren , Steven Miao , Tony Luck Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 13 August 2013 19:02, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Currently prototype of cpufreq_drivers target routines is: > > int target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int target_freq, > unsigned int relation); > > And most of the drivers call cpufreq_frequency_table_target() to get a valid > index of their frequency table which is closest to the target_freq. And they > don't use target_freq and relation after it. I just came to know from a friend that I have written "covert" instead of "convert" in subjects of all the patches. Will fix it in my repo for now. Thanks Sudeep :) -- viresh From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 13:58:00 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 00/35] CPUFreq: Implement light weight ->target(): for 3.13 Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On 13 August 2013 19:02, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Currently prototype of cpufreq_drivers target routines is: > > int target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int target_freq, > unsigned int relation); > > And most of the drivers call cpufreq_frequency_table_target() to get a valid > index of their frequency table which is closest to the target_freq. And they > don't use target_freq and relation after it. I just came to know from a friend that I have written "covert" instead of "convert" in subjects of all the patches. Will fix it in my repo for now. Thanks Sudeep :) -- viresh From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: viresh.kumar@linaro.org (Viresh Kumar) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 19:16:00 +0530 Subject: [PATCH V2 00/35] CPUFreq: Implement light weight ->target(): for 3.13 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 13 August 2013 19:02, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Currently prototype of cpufreq_drivers target routines is: > > int target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int target_freq, > unsigned int relation); > > And most of the drivers call cpufreq_frequency_table_target() to get a valid > index of their frequency table which is closest to the target_freq. And they > don't use target_freq and relation after it. I just came to know from a friend that I have written "covert" instead of "convert" in subjects of all the patches. Will fix it in my repo for now. Thanks Sudeep :) -- viresh