From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752961AbbIHCNQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Sep 2015 22:13:16 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.220.51]:33175 "EHLO mail-pa0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751981AbbIHCNO (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Sep 2015 22:13:14 -0400 Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 07:43:09 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, preeti.lkml@gmail.com, open list Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 6/9] cpufreq: ondemand: queue work for policy->cpus together Message-ID: <20150908021309.GC26760@linux> References: <2662457.Ri7bTTTVA1@vostro.rjw.lan> <20150908021101.GA26760@linux> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150908021101.GA26760@linux> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08-09-15, 07:41, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > next_sampling = jiffies + usecs_to_jiffies(new_rate); > > > appointed_at = dbs_info->cdbs.dwork.timer.expires; > > > > For that to work we always need to do stuff for policy->cpus in sync. > > Do we? > > Hmm, we are not in 100% sync for sure. Will check that again. On the other hand, if we decide to apply 7/9 as well, then this is anyway going to get removed :) -- viresh