From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755680AbbJ1Ieg (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 04:34:36 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.220.45]:34204 "EHLO mail-pa0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755613AbbJ1Ie3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 04:34:29 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:04:24 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, open list Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/5] cpufreq: ondemand: queue work for policy->cpus together Message-ID: <20151028083424.GF30039@ubuntu> References: <1864040.ba6Ezq0vlE@vostro.rjw.lan> <20151028064635.GC30039@ubuntu> <1726178.nnqopTm3i6@vostro.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1726178.nnqopTm3i6@vostro.rjw.lan> 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 28-10-15, 08:33, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > It looks like we shouldn't be using delayed works for this, really. > > We should be using timer functions and normal work items. Schedule the > timer function on all CPUs sharing the policy and then queue up the > work item from the first one that executes the timer. Then make the > timer function bail out immediately until the work has completed and > re-schedule the timers from the work item. Okay, I will try to get some code out for that then. -- viresh