Hi Viresh, On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 30 August 2013 12:18, Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi Viresh, >> >> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have been doing some CPUFreq cleanup work and >>> wanted to know if the below mentioned machines have separate >>> clock domains for their CPUs or all share the same domain? >>> >>> So, that we can use some generic routines for these drivers which >>> would eventually do: >>> >>> cpumask_setall(policy->cpus); >>> >>> And I wanted to make sure that this doesn't break them.. :) >>> >>> ...... >>> >>> The drivers are: >> ... >>> drivers/cpufreq/sh-cpufreq.c >> ... >> >> The above SH cpufreq driver seems to be written with SMP in mind, but >> I would say SMP is a very rare case for SH. So I believe it can be >> considered as UP-only at this point. If Paul disagrees I'm quite sure >> he will tell us. > > Okay.. The problem isn't really SMP but different clock domains for CPUs > in a SMP system.. > > So, even if we have a SMP SH machine, will it have same clock line for > all CPUs? Yeah, I understand your question but I'm afraid that I don't know the answer myself. > I will go with the change anyway.. Good plan. Thanks for cleaning up the cpufreq bits. Cheers, / magnus -- 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
