From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chanwoo Choi Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / devfreq: Remove redundant frequency adjustment from governors Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 08:18:14 +0900 Message-ID: <5AFE0DB6.1060801@samsung.com> References: <20180516211051.78875-1-mka@chromium.org> <20180517224126.GP19594@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: In-reply-to: <20180517224126.GP19594@google.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Matthias Kaehlcke , MyungJoo Ham , Kyungmin Park Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Brian Norris , Douglas Anderson List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On 2018년 05월 18일 07:41, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 02:10:51PM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: >> The performance, powersave, simpleondemand and userspace governors >> determine a target frequency and then adjust it according to the >> df->min/max_freq limits that might have been set by user space. This >> adjustment is redundant, it is done in update_devfreq() for any >> governor, right after governor->get_target_freq(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke >> --- >> drivers/devfreq/governor_performance.c | 10 ++-------- >> drivers/devfreq/governor_powersave.c | 5 ----- >> drivers/devfreq/governor_simpleondemand.c | 7 +------ >> drivers/devfreq/governor_userspace.c | 16 ++++------------ >> 4 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/governor_performance.c b/drivers/devfreq/governor_performance.c >> index 4d23ecfbd948..31ee30622c00 100644 >> --- a/drivers/devfreq/governor_performance.c >> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/governor_performance.c >> @@ -16,14 +16,8 @@ >> static int devfreq_performance_func(struct devfreq *df, >> unsigned long *freq) >> { >> - /* >> - * target callback should be able to get floor value as >> - * said in devfreq.h >> - */ >> - if (!df->max_freq) >> - *freq = UINT_MAX; >> - else >> - *freq = df->max_freq; >> + *freq = UINT_MAX; >> + >> return 0; >> } > > For the record, the frequency adjustment in update_devfreq() is > currently broken for df->max_freq == 0: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10407827/ Why don't you send patch set? It is very difficult to track the history and a correlation between patches. Usually, if patches have the dependency between patches, send the patch set with cover-letter. -- Best Regards, Chanwoo Choi Samsung Electronics