From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] cpufreq: Introduce ->usable() callback for cpufreq drivers Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 05:58:00 +0530 Message-ID: References: <95b84bb8af3d4d9667a79db520cfa37d9444d75b.1416980448.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> <5490890.8GRTWn2e7b@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-oi0-f48.google.com ([209.85.218.48]:33185 "EHLO mail-oi0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751139AbaK0A2B (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2014 19:28:01 -0500 Received: by mail-oi0-f48.google.com with SMTP id u20so2752043oif.7 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 16:28:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5490890.8GRTWn2e7b@vostro.rjw.lan> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Eduardo Valentin , Lists linaro-kernel , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Lukasz Majewski On 27 November 2014 at 05:55, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> + void (*usable)(struct cpufreq_policy *policy); > > What about > > void (*ready)(struct cpufreq_policy *policy); That was the second option doing rounds in my thoughts :) As two people like it now (You and Me), lets move to that :) -- viresh