This is embarassing. I generated this series incorrectly. It is missing a patch removing netlink support. v3 coming right up. Sorry for the noise. On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 4:00 PM Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Changes since v1: > - Completely get rid of netlink support in the thermal framework. > - This changes the early init patch to a single line - change to > core_initcall. Changed authorship of patch since it is nothing like the > original. Lina, let me know if you feel otherwise. > - I've tested to make sure that the qcom-cpufreq-hw driver continues to > work correctly as a module so this won't impact Android's GKI plans. > - Collected Acks > > Device boot needs to be as fast as possible while keeping under the thermal > envelope. Now that thermal framework is built-in to the kernel, we can > initialize it earlier to enable thermal mitigation during boot. > > We also need the cpufreq HW drivers to be initialised earlier to act as the > cooling devices. This series only converts over the qcom-hw driver to > initialize earlier but can be extended to other platforms as well. > > Amit Kucheria (5): > thermal: Initialize thermal subsystem earlier > cpufreq: Initialise the governors in core_initcall > cpufreq: Initialize cpufreq-dt driver earlier > clk: qcom: Initialise clock drivers earlier > cpufreq: qcom-hw: Move driver initialisation earlier > > drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c | 2 +- > drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-qcs404.c | 2 +- > drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-sdm845.c | 2 +- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c | 2 +- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 2 +- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c | 2 +- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_performance.c | 2 +- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_powersave.c | 2 +- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_userspace.c | 2 +- > drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c | 2 +- > drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c | 3 ++- > 11 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.17.1 >
