On 02-02-16, 14:21, Saravana Kannan wrote: > I also don't like this patch because it forces governors to either implement > their own macros and management of their attributes or force them to use the > governor structs that come with cpufreq_governor.h. cpufreq_governor.h IMHO > is very ondemand and conservative governor specific and is very irrelevant > for sched-dvfs or any other governors (hint hint).
But who is stopping us from breaking that file and moving some of it into include/linux/cpufreq.h ? We can do that today as well, but it would be fine to do that, when we add more governors to the core. Though, it would only take a simple patch if people want me to do it now. > The only time this ABBA locking is an issue is when governor are changing > and trying to add/remove attributes. That can easily be checked in > store_governor store_scaling_governor ?? > and dealt with without holding the policy rwsem if the Are you saying that we could have taken the rwsem from the generic cpufreq.c:store() and dropped it from store_scaling_governor() ? That would have been something similar to what I tried earlier, which I never posted (I gave the link to that few days back). > governors can provide their per sys and per policy attribute arrays as part > of registering themselves. These per-sys and per-policy attributes really suck. There is nothing really different in the implementation, just that the show/store callbacks have different prototype. One accept 'kboj' as the parameter, other accept 'policy'. I would call that a HACK as well (I only implemented it though). That should just die. A single list of attributes is what we should have had initially as well. -- viresh
