RE: ia64 acpi-cpufreq driver

Bjorn Helgaas
2006-10-25T03:47:34Z

> Yes. As it is today, acpi-cpufreq contains FFH driver functionality
> in itself. It calls acpi and cpufreq arch-independent interfaces but
> implements FFH internally.
>
> By, FFH driver do you mean to handle FFH related functions only for
> P-states or something that can handle all FFH functions (like C-states,
> etc).
> I don't see any other kernel part/or driver will use this particular
> PAL_GET_PSTATE and PAL_SET_PSTATE intefaces. So, my feeling is we don't
> need a separate FFH driver.

The only reason I can think of to have a separate FFH driver
would be that we could potentially combine parts of the x86
acpi-cpufreq and the ia64 acpi-cpufreq.

I didn't look closely, but the x86 and ia64 acpi-cpufreq drivers
looked pretty different, even apart from the FFH stuff, so maybe
that wouldn't be feasible.

Bjorn