On 30-10-18, 14:35, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> I'm wondering if having a statically per_cpu variable, even if it is not
> free at the end, isn't worth regarding the twisted code we end up with
> an allocation.
Maybe yeah.
--
viresh
On 30/10/2018 09:33, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 30-10-18, 08:55, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> The workqueue is called from init_cpu_capacity_callback(). This one is
>> called in the notifier callback. IOW the notification callback
>> unregisters itself. But if it is not registered, it won't unregister,
>
On 30-10-18, 08:55, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> The workqueue is called from init_cpu_capacity_callback(). This one is
> called in the notifier callback. IOW the notification callback
> unregisters itself. But if it is not registered, it won't unregister,
> hence it won't call the workqueue and init_cp
On 30/10/2018 06:50, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 9:56 PM Daniel Lezcano
> wrote:
>
> Would have been better if I was cc'd on all the patches since I was
> looking at this
> stuff actively this week :)
ah, yes. Sorry for that.
>> The function 'register_cpufreq_notifier' regist
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 9:56 PM Daniel Lezcano
wrote:
Would have been better if I was cc'd on all the patches since I was
looking at this
stuff actively this week :)
> The function 'register_cpufreq_notifier' registers the
> init_cpu_capacity_notifier() only if raw_capacity is not NULL.
>
> Henc
The function 'register_cpufreq_notifier' registers the
init_cpu_capacity_notifier() only if raw_capacity is not NULL.
Hence init_cpu_capacity_notifier() can not be called with raw_capacity
set to NULL, it is pointless to check it.
Remove the check.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano
---
drivers/bas
6 matches
Mail list logo
