From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Expose cpufreq coordination requirements regardless of coordination mechanism Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:41:24 -0700 Message-ID: <20080321154124.668969a2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20080321004354.GQ5529@tree.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080321004354.GQ5529@tree.beaverton.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:43:54 -0700 "Darrick J. Wong" wrote: > Currently, affected_cpus shows which CPUs need to have their frequency > coordinated in software. When hardware coordination is in use, the > contents of this file appear the same as when no coordination is > required. This can lead to some confusion among user-space programs, > for example, that do not know that extra coordination is required to > force a CPU core to a particular speed to control power consumption. > > To fix this, create a "related_cpus" attribute that always displays > the coordination map regardless of whatever coordination strategy > the cpufreq driver uses (sw or hw). If the cpufreq driver does not > provide a value, fall back to policy->cpus. I was going to ding you for not updating the kernel->userspace API documentation. But it seems that none of this interface is documented anyway :(