On 25 November 2013 22:08, Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > IMHO this issue should be fixed in the scaling driver for the platform. > > The scaling driver sets policy->cur and fills in the frequency table and has Not anymore, policy->cur is set in the core for most of the drivers now. Drivers just provide ->get() callbacks. > the ability to adjust the frequency of the CPU. I believe this kind of decisions should stay with the core, drivers should just provide the backend instead of intelligence.. > Letting this leak up into the core > is wrong IMHO and just widens the window where the CPU will be running at > the wrong frequency set by the bootloader. It doesn't stay there for long enough.. we get to this point in cpufreq core just after calling ->init(), and if the CPU is working without issues until now, it will stay stable for few more milliseconds. > Shouldn't there be a check to see if the problem exists at all? Otherwise > the core is setting a policy for ALL platform even those where the issue > does > not exist. That is taken care of by __cpufreq_driver_target(). It checks if we are already running at requested frequency or not (after getting the next higher frequency)... If current freq is present in table, cpufreq_frequency_table_target() will return current frequency only for policy->cur -1. And so we will not end up configuring hardware unnecessarily. -- 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
