On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 30-03-16, 03:47, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
>> @@ -843,6 +883,7 @@ static int acpi_cpufreq_cpu_exit(struct
>> pr_debug("acpi_cpufreq_cpu_exit\n");
>>
>> if (data) {
>> + policy->fast_switch_possible = false;
>
> Is this done just for keeping code symmetric or is there a logical advantage
> of this? Just for my understanding, not saying that it is wrong.
It is not necessary for correctness today, as schedutil will be the
only governor using fast switch, but generally that prevents leaking
configuration information from one governor to another.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
