On 17-11-20, 14:06, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Is this really a cpufreq thing, though, or is it arch stuff? I think > the latter, because it is not necessary for anything in cpufreq. > > Yes, acpi-cpufreq happens to know this information, because it uses > processor_perflib, but the latter may as well be used by the arch > enumeration of CPUs and the freqdomain_cpus mask may be populated from > there. > > As far as cpufreq is concerned, if the interface to the hardware is > per-CPU, there is one CPU per policy and cpufreq has no business > knowing anything about the underlying hardware coordination. It won't be used by cpufreq for now at least and yes I understand your concern. I opted for this because we already have a cpufreq implementation for the same thing and it is usually better to reuse this kind of stuff instead of inventing it over. -- viresh
