On 28 November 2013 18:39, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > acpi-cpufreq is one at least. > > Anyway, this isn't about ACPI or anything like that, but hardware. Generally > speaking, on modern Intel hardware the processor itself chooses the frequency > to run at and it may do that behind your back. Moreover, it can choose a > frequency different from the one you asked for. And it won't choose one that > it can't run at for that matter. :-) > > Overall, I don't believe that the problem you're trying to address is relevant > for any non-exotic x86 hardware. Okay.. So wouldn't it be better that we add this special flag only when we face a real problem? Otherwise this flag might stay unused for long time and then we might end up removing it.. >> > So there should be a flag for >> > drivers indicating whether or not frequencies (or operation points in >> > general) are directly testable and the check should only be done for >> > the drivers with the flag set. >> >> Probably a flag with properties exactly opposite to what you mentioned, >> so that we don't need to modify most of the drivers.. > > That would work too if you prefer it. In case we need this flag, what should we name it? ALLOW_UNKNOWN_FREQ ?? -- 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
