[PATCH] cpufreq: exynos: Broadcast frequency change notifications for all cores

On Thursday 31 of January 2013 20:46:10 Viresh Kumar wrote:

On 31 January 2013 20:34, Tomasz Figa [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Well, the fact that it isn't used at the moment doesn't mean that it
shouldn't be set correctly. The field is present in the structure and
has a set of defined values - one of which should be selected. For
example, I can imagine some governor taking this information into
account.

Governors already take this information but from a different variable:
policy->cpus.

Look at the patch which added it:

commit 3b2d99429e3386b6e2ac949fc72486509c8bbe36
Author: Venkatesh Pallipadi [off-list ref]
Date:   Wed Dec 14 15:05:00 2005 -0500

    P-state software coordination for ACPI core

    http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5737

    Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi [off-list ref]
    Signed-off-by: Len Brown [off-list ref]
---
 drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c | 228
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/acpi/processor.h         |
 27 ++++++++++++-
 include/linux/cpufreq.h          |   4 ++
 3 files changed, 258 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)


It was clearly for ACPI, but was probably named badly and we people
got confused that it is for our use.

Hmm. Now as I think of it, there might be another confusing aspect:

Could you explain what "sw coordination" and "any coordination" mean?
I mean specifically cpufreq_policy.cpus and cpufreq_policy.related_cpus 
masks.

Best regards,
-- 
Tomasz Figa
Samsung Poland R&D Center
SW Solution Development, Linux Platform