On 29 May 2013 12:39, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I also agree. Moreover, I think that there should be only one set of > "boost" sysfs entries either it is supported by HW (Intel) or SW (ARM). Yes, you need to change acpi-cpufreq driver too to use this common infrastructure. > I can think of two "basic" one: > - max_turbo_freq (ro) This is surely per policy as two separate clusters can have separate values. And probably a better one would be scaling_boost_frequencies, that will list all boost frequencies. > - turbo_mode/boost (rw) I am confused with these two names: boost and turbo.. Probably we should use a single name everywhere. Because acpi-cpufreq is already using boost, we might shift to that. > - /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost Obviously this one. > On the other hand first option would be used with systems, where > per-core (or core sets) frequency setting is possible (b.L, Snapdragon > S4) For now this feature would be enabled on all clusters and controlled by cpu/cpufreq/boost. > To sum up - the idea is as follow: > > 1. cpufreq_driver exports turbo_mode=1 when it supports overclocking > (this support can be hardcoded or read from device tree) > > 2. Then proper entries are exported to sysfs. > > 3. User via sysfs (at [*]) can enable/disable the feature on demand Bingo!! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
