From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8EFCC433E0 for ; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 11:56:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4470E206C0 for ; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 11:56:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="n3FRfqC1" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4470E206C0 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49sz4G1PmNzDqjd for ; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 21:55:58 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=google.com (client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::343; helo=mail-wm1-x343.google.com; envelope-from=qperret@google.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20161025 header.b=n3FRfqC1; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-wm1-x343.google.com (mail-wm1-x343.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::343]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49sz1N4wM2zDqcJ for ; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 21:53:26 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-wm1-x343.google.com with SMTP id t194so5614067wmt.4 for ; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 04:53:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=L4pFCzHJgLhT16AIpG64Yl9/rDj1/+gYvG4jvCw9F50=; b=n3FRfqC1licA7sUvOVNsmYWGO4K/7vUEPRhyqo4fBRqJTuRXkEEQHh7uwPCnN+FcSf ENydElYHJy9PUQYU9sfu1loBq5H0SIftbO5Sht4ahrm0xfMnJWRT8ci/38Brp/clygPK L+kiUfWAo1teGmyfYs8LGk4Be7IorgzrIWkIJkU3+o97MGk2rpkBjG0TTaRxtyGh3tTs EeCP+GkZCM3t1EJHFzQFkTYrnf8HsuUcHNDQc4lZ7iWF+4scXEzFr1ns/1MxaOcUwWTj JPmiymJ2xlffeNK125ctWiPcqf8r9RQ46JpCxIewZ2tZTAghyq1qmdPz+xuCXqYbiZRg gZRA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=L4pFCzHJgLhT16AIpG64Yl9/rDj1/+gYvG4jvCw9F50=; b=L064KKwGk3zTDnZwsp/vc0dzr8yFwdvpm0krjO+EQ7f7/5zVGAjN8wWElW1A3UICdP vIA59AXxUMHQrvXHXx+ky4aVze+Ba/TPlSedYt3jkpI/Sz9qXEaXipW7bL6Zcc+1LAvE qbQc1rm89P6ZAPKQt3ZcNccaoZZYLCMzb/OlqlTWWNakBJAvWm+0MkgqQuT8MJnFLT55 gqWr6YQwNQ6PM67Y64BlANhBcQpF2KohwZj7uFlRqb9mUnK78kSh5gN59E3ez5B5Ed5h vry9lTyR5w+qR6BctEGlRpGLG/IscckY77Cwx1FMDvOQh/gCaelBAZ5sfO+V+4wj83ha QWYg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Fk56TaMVkDOsaDkKgzBimZqYipQLIKKVkNt8qBkd6JCN30vqw B7UpiK2m4j34cb5y9KE38K0A+w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzB3iG4QLOlxIPODy0q2tWS2+hoPSsNM/MppS52ewBi9bFqIsOWO5K4QEbJ3JGH6DNum7H2Og== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:2d54:: with SMTP id t81mr3196690wmt.154.1593086002391; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 04:53:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2a00:79e0:d:110:d6cc:2030:37c1:9964]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 104sm32104033wrl.25.2020.06.25.04.53.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 25 Jun 2020 04:53:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 12:53:18 +0100 From: Quentin Perret To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] cpufreq: Specify default governor on command line Message-ID: <20200625115318.GA219598@google.com> References: <20200623142138.209513-1-qperret@google.com> <20200623142138.209513-3-qperret@google.com> <20200625113602.z2xrwebd2gngbww3@vireshk-i7> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Juri Lelli , "Cc: Android Kernel" , Vincent Guittot , Arnd Bergmann , Linux PM , Peter Zijlstra , Viresh Kumar , adharmap@codeaurora.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ingo Molnar , Paul Mackerras , linuxppc-dev , Todd Kjos Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Thursday 25 Jun 2020 at 13:44:34 (+0200), Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 1:36 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > > This change is not right IMO. This part handles the set-policy case, > > where there are no governors. Right now this code, for some reasons > > unknown to me, forcefully uses the default governor set to indicate > > the policy, which is not a great idea in my opinion TBH. This doesn't > > and shouldn't care about governor modules and should only be looking > > at strings instead of governor pointer. > > Sounds right. > > > Rafael, I even think we should remove this code completely and just > > rely on what the driver has sent to us. Using the selected governor > > for set policy drivers is very confusing and also we shouldn't be > > forced to compiling any governor for the set-policy case. > > Well, AFAICS the idea was to use the default governor as a kind of > default policy proxy, but I agree that strings should be sufficient > for that. I agree with all the above. I'd much rather not rely on the default governor name to populate the default policy, too, so +1 from me. Thanks, Quentin