On 31 January 2013 20:34, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Well, the fact that it isn't used at the moment doesn't mean that it
> shouldn't be set correctly. The field is present in the structure and has
> a set of defined values - one of which should be selected. For example,
> I can imagine some governor taking this information into account.
Governors already take this information but from a different variable:
policy->cpus.
Look at the patch which added it:
commit 3b2d99429e3386b6e2ac949fc72486509c8bbe36
Author: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed Dec 14 15:05:00 2005 -0500
P-state software coordination for ACPI core
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5737
Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c | 228
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/acpi/processor.h | 27 ++++++++++++-
include/linux/cpufreq.h | 4 ++
3 files changed, 258 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
It was clearly for ACPI, but was probably named badly and we people
got confused that it is for our use.
--
viresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
