On 29 April 2014 10:54, Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
> -static void exynos_sort_descend_freq_table(void)
> -{
> - struct cpufreq_frequency_table *freq_tbl = dvfs_info->freq_table;
> - int i = 0, index;
> - unsigned int tmp_freq;
> - /*
> - * Exynos5440 clock controller state logic expects the cpufreq table
> to
> - * be in descending order. But the OPP library constructs the table
> in
> - * ascending order. So to make the table descending we just need to
> - * swap the i element with the N - i element.
> - */
What I am more focused is on: Why do we need to worry about order at
all in the first place.
Okay, above comment says something about it but I couldn't understand
what's the logic behind that. Why do we need same order as of clock
controller. Please point out relevant code pieces as well..
@Amit: Your comments on this ?
--
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
