Thread (7 messages) 7 messages, 3 authors, 2013-08-28

Re: [Query] CPUFreq: Why do we need policy->user_policy?

From: Rafael J. Wysocki <hidden>
Date: 2013-08-27 21:09:51
Also in: lkml

On Tuesday, August 27, 2013 10:04:52 PM Lan Tianyu wrote:
2013/8/27 Viresh Kumar [off-list ref]:
quoted
On 26 August 2013 20:53, Lan Tianyu [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
So far as I know, it stores some user's config and cpufreq_update_policy()
bases on the data in the struct to start a new policy. Cpu thermal driver
(/driver/thermal/cpu_cooling.c)also will its value to update freq policy
when receive a cpufreq policy adjust notification.
Yeah, but how are these different from policy->min/max/policy/governor?
Why do we need to replicate this information?
From my understanding.policy->min/max may be modified by some drivers
but the user_policy only store user space config and should not be changed
by other reason.  :)
Yes, that was the original idea IIRC, so separate user settings from stuff that
may be changed internally by the kernel.

Thanks,
Rafael
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help