From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpufreq: Replace timers with utilization update callbacks Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 18:38:37 +0100 Message-ID: <20160211173837.GQ6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <3071836.JbNxX8hU6x@vostro.rjw.lan> <56B93548.9090006@linaro.org> <5387313.xAhVpzgZCg@vostro.rjw.lan> <56BA8C29.4090905@linaro.org> <20160211115959.GI6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <56BCBF7C.2080404@linaro.org> <20160211173033.GP6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Steve Muckle , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux PM list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Srinivas Pandruvada , Viresh Kumar , Juri Lelli , Thomas Gleixner List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 06:34:05PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > I've updated the patch in the meantime > (https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8283431/). > > Should I move the RT/DL hooks to task_tick_rt/dl(), respectively? Probably, this really is about kicking cpufreq to do something, right? update_curr_*() seems overkill for that.