On 08/21/2013 04:31 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Tegra's cpufreq driver was maintaining requested target frequencies in an array: > target_cpu_speed. And then finally setting the highest requested freq in the > core. This was probably done because both cores share clock line and logically > we want to set both cores to the max frequency requested.. > > But this wasn't required to be done in individual CPUFreq drivers, its already > taken care of by CPUFreq governors. They evaluate load for all CPUs and finally > call target only for the frequency corresponding to max load. > > So, get rid of this stuff from Tegra's cpufreq driver. > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Hi Stephen, > > Its only build tested and depends on lots of stuff that I have already sent for > cpufreq core and its drivers. All of that is pushed here: > https://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/vireshk/linux.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/for-v3.13 > > And only Tegra+cpufreq-core patches are pushed here (only 13 patches): > https://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/vireshk/linux.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/cpufreq-next-tegra > > You can probably try cpufreq-next-tegra branch for testing on some real > hardware. Acked-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxx> I did test your branch on a Tegra20 and Tegra30 board without issues. But recall that our cpufreq driver doesn't actually get initialized since the conversion of Tegra to the common clock framework, so I haven't really tested the cpufreq changes, except to ensure that nothing in those branches breaks other basic functionality. -- 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
