From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3 v3] cpufreq: governor: Replace timers with utilization
 update callbacks
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 14:40:39 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0hGHUSUnQmr+uQHjS-4xHL8PFXmMDJ-e2ShxPxH0hPFAA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3071836.JbNxX8hU6x@vostro.rjw.lan>
	<20160207091040.GA6112@vireshk>
	<1855005.ZFAA5ekheo@vostro.rjw.lan>
	<2172360.cldhrkXzeh@vostro.rjw.lan>
	<20160208115248.GC8294@vireshk>
	<CAJZ5v0gVffRb33CJcrTY5KEPY04MQNp=uqsGFwMevZAEuYBGfg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0gVffRb33CJcrTY5KEPY04MQNp=uqsGFwMevZAEuYBGfg@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>, Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 08-02-16, 03:08, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> Moreover, update_sampling_rate() doesn't need to walk the cpu_dbs_infos,
>>> it may walk policies instead.  Like after the (untested) appended patch.
>>>
>>> Then, if we have a governor_data_lock in struct policy, we can use that
>>> to protect policy_dbs while it is being access there and we're done.
>>>
>>> I'll try to prototype something along these lines tomorrow.
>>
>> I have solved that in a different way, and dropped the lock from
>> update_sampling_rate(). Please see if that looks good.
>
> Well, almost.
>
> I like the list approach, but you need to be careful about it.  Let me
> comment more on the patches in the series.
>
> I have a gut feeling that my idea of walking policies will end up
> being simpler in the end, but let's see. :-)

Well, my gut feeling seems to have been incorrect, as often happens.

Thanks,
Rafael