linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 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

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

Thread overview: 17+ 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 ` [PATCH V3 2/3] arm64: topology: Reorder init_amu_fie() a bit Viresh Kumar
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 11:56   ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-12-16  0:03   ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-12-16  4:38     ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-16 19:37       ` Ionela Voinescu
2020-12-17 10:50         ` Viresh Kumar
2021-01-08  9:44           ` Ionela Voinescu
2021-01-08 10:42             ` Ionela Voinescu
2021-01-08 11:03             ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2020-12-17  7:57 ` [PATCH V3 1/3] arm64: topology: Avoid the have_policy check Viresh Kumar
2020-12-17 10:55   ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-18  4:26     ` Viresh Kumar
2020-12-18 11:01       ` Catalin Marinas
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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).