From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gautham R Shenoy Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/10] cpufreq: Clean up default and fallback governor setup Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:45:14 +0530 Message-ID: <20160210051514.GA31787@in.ibm.com> References: <3705929.bslqXH980s@vostro.rjw.lan> <9008098.QDD8C89zDx@vostro.rjw.lan> <7056089.34C11T15Ra@vostro.rjw.lan> Reply-To: ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.151]:39086 "EHLO e33.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751003AbcBJFPl (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:15:41 -0500 Received: from localhost by e33.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 22:15:41 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7056089.34C11T15Ra@vostro.rjw.lan> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux PM list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Viresh Kumar , Srinivas Pandruvada , Juri Lelli , Steve Muckle , Saravana Kannan Hello Rafael, On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 03:11:54AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: [..snip..] > Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_performance.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_performance.c > +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_performance.c > @@ -33,10 +33,7 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_performance( > return 0; > } > > -#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE_MODULE > -static > -#endif > -struct cpufreq_governor cpufreq_gov_performance = { > +static struct cpufreq_governor cpufreq_gov_performance = { > .name = "performance", > .governor = cpufreq_governor_performance, > .owner = THIS_MODULE, > @@ -52,6 +49,19 @@ static void __exit cpufreq_gov_performan > cpufreq_unregister_governor(&cpufreq_gov_performance); > } > > +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE > +struct cpufreq_governor *cpufreq_default_governor(void) > +{ > + return &cpufreq_gov_performance; > +} > +#endif > +#ifndef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE_MODULE Shouldn't this be #ifdef ? > +struct cpufreq_governor *cpufreq_fallback_governor(void) > +{ > + return &cpufreq_gov_performance; > +} > +#endif -- Thanks and Regards gautham.