Most of the drivers do following in their ->target_index() routines:
struct cpufreq_freqs freqs;
freqs.old = old freq...
freqs.new = new freq...
cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE);
/* Change rate here */
cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE);
This is replicated over all cpufreq drivers today and there doesn't exists a
good enough reason why this shouldn't be moved to cpufreq core instead.
Earlier patches have added support in cpufreq core to do cpufreq notification on
frequency change, but this drivers needs to do this notification itself and so
it sets its CPUFREQ_NO_NOTIFICATION flag.
Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
index 91a64d6..8fb6183 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
@@ -323,7 +323,7 @@ static int exynos_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
}
static struct cpufreq_driver exynos_driver = {
- .flags = CPUFREQ_STICKY,
+ .flags = CPUFREQ_STICKY | CPUFREQ_NO_NOTIFICATION,
.verify = cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify,
.target_index = exynos_target,
.get = exynos_getspeed,
--
1.7.12.rc2.18.g61b472e
--
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
