From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Muckle Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: Use sorted frequency tables Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 12:37:09 -0700 Message-ID: <20160601193709.GP9864@graphite.smuckle.net> References: <20160601010856.GM9864@graphite.smuckle.net> <1514420.VAnFJF0vi6@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f175.google.com ([209.85.192.175]:33893 "EHLO mail-pf0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750744AbcFAThN (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2016 15:37:13 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f175.google.com with SMTP id 62so20841951pfd.1 for ; Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:37:12 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1514420.VAnFJF0vi6@vostro.rjw.lan> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Steve Muckle , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Lists linaro-kernel , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 06:40:36PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Also what about leaving it as is? I didn't fully catch the concern with > > abuse in the series I posted, and it pushes this complexity of dealing > > with the freq table efficiently down into the driver, which is best > > suited for that IMO. > > The concern is that all drivers using frequency tables would probably > implement the callbacks in question in a very similar way, leading to > quite a bit of code duplication. That's rarely a good thing. Could this be assuaged with helper macros exported by cpufreq?