From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] cpufreq: create cpu/cpufreq/policyX directories Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:09:12 +0530 Message-ID: <20151013033912.GN5386@linux> References: <561C0A8B.5010509@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com ([209.85.220.48]:34780 "EHLO mail-pa0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932340AbbJMDjk (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:39:40 -0400 Received: by padhy16 with SMTP id hy16so7181191pad.1 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 20:39:39 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <561C0A8B.5010509@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Saravana Kannan Cc: Rafael Wysocki , linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, open list On 12-10-15, 12:31, Saravana Kannan wrote: > Can we use the first CPU in the related CPUs mask? Instead of the > first CPU that the policy got created on? The policyX numbering > would be a bit more consistent that way. Okay.. > Suggested-by: ? Will add. Though me/Rafael thought about it long back, but then dropped the idea :) > Didn't notice when this got added. Do we really need this anymore if > we don't care about moving the directory and creating symlinks? I > don't think we need it anymore. And if we really need to know > related - offline, we can use for_each_cpu_and(related, > online/present mask) Its about tracking present-cpus, for which the link is present. So, it is still required. -- viresh