Hi Rafael, On 03/21/2016 06:53 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Add two new policy flags, fast_switch_possible, to be set by the > cpufreq driver if fast frequency switching can be used for the > given policy and fast_switch_enabled, to be set by the governor > if it is going to use fast frequency switching for the given > policy. Also add a helper for setting the latter. ... > @@ -740,6 +777,9 @@ static int acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct > goto err_unreg; > } > > + policy->fast_switch_possible = !acpi_pstate_strict && > + !(policy_is_shared(policy) && policy->shared_type != > CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY);
Could the policy->fast_switch_possible flag be avoided by just checking whether a driver has registered the .fast_switch callback? ... > @@ -1726,6 +1810,34 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpufreq_unregister_notifie > * GOVERNORS * > *********************************************************************/ > > +/** > + * cpufreq_driver_fast_switch - Carry out a fast CPU frequency switch. > + * @policy: cpufreq policy to switch the frequency for. > + * @target_freq: New frequency to set (may be approximate). > + * > + * Carry out a fast frequency switch from interrupt context. I think that should say atomic rather than interrupt as this might not be called from interrupt context. thanks, Steve
