From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/5] cpufreq: ondemand: update sampling rate immediately
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:17:29 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151028154729.GI3716@ubuntu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3949153.K5IjKZhpbI@vostro.rjw.lan>
On 28-10-15, 17:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Well, the second statement above sort of contradicts the first one. :-)
>
> I guess the answer is "it is problematic, because I can't do the other
> optimization then".
Hehe, right.
> To that I'd really suggest trying to rework the code to use timer
> functions directly in the first place.
I will, but this problem will be present there as well. Because at
that point of time, we will talk about per-cpu timers instead of
delayed-works.
--
viresh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-28 15:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-13 8:09 [PATCH V3 0/5] CPUFreq: governors: further cleanups Viresh Kumar
2015-10-13 8:09 ` [PATCH V3 1/5] cpufreq: ondemand: Drop unnecessary locks from update_sampling_rate() Viresh Kumar
2015-10-28 4:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-10-28 4:44 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-10-28 5:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-10-28 6:43 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-10-28 7:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-10-28 8:56 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-10-13 8:09 ` [PATCH V3 2/5] cpufreq: ondemand: update sampling rate immediately Viresh Kumar
2015-10-28 6:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-10-28 9:31 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-10-28 15:31 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-10-28 15:28 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-10-28 16:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-10-28 15:47 ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2015-10-13 8:09 ` [PATCH V3 3/5] cpufreq: ondemand: queue work for policy->cpus together Viresh Kumar
2015-10-28 6:38 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-10-28 6:46 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-10-28 7:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-10-28 8:34 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-10-13 8:09 ` [PATCH V3 4/5] cpufreq: governor: Quit work-handlers early if governor is stopped Viresh Kumar
2015-10-28 7:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-10-28 8:25 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-10-28 15:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-10-28 14:46 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-10-13 8:09 ` [PATCH V3 5/5] cpufreq: Get rid of ->governor_enabled and its lock Viresh Kumar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20151028154729.GI3716@ubuntu \
--to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).