amit daniel kachhap wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > 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>
Acked-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks,
Kukjin
> > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> The code change looks fine,
> Acked-By: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks
> Amit Daniel
> > ---
> > 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
