| Message ID | f216e85846c302756d55cb6753863a66697f79a6.1359599087.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Rejected, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 31 January 2013 10:22, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: > With the recent changes in cpufreq core, we just need to set mask of all > possible cpus into policy->cpus. Rest would be done by core. > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Oops! Sent the wrong patch again. Ignore this mail :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 31 January 2013 07:56, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: > With the recent changes in cpufreq core, we just need to set mask of all > possible cpus into policy->cpus. Rest would be done by core. > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c | 14 +------------- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 13 deletions(-) Hi Rafael, Are you picking up this patch ? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 4 February 2013 17:52, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: > On 31 January 2013 07:56, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: >> With the recent changes in cpufreq core, we just need to set mask of all >> possible cpus into policy->cpus. Rest would be done by core. >> >> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> >> --- >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c | 14 +------------- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 13 deletions(-) > > Hi Rafael, > > Are you picking up this patch ? Ping!! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c index 7012ea8..81eb84a 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c @@ -227,19 +227,7 @@ static int exynos_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) /* set the transition latency value */ policy->cpuinfo.transition_latency = 100000; - /* - * EXYNOS4 multi-core processors has 2 cores - * that the frequency cannot be set independently. - * Each cpu is bound to the same speed. - * So the affected cpu is all of the cpus. - */ - if (num_online_cpus() == 1) { - cpumask_copy(policy->related_cpus, cpu_possible_mask); - cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, cpu_online_mask); - } else { - policy->shared_type = CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_ANY; - cpumask_setall(policy->cpus); - } + cpumask_setall(policy->cpus); return cpufreq_frequency_table_cpuinfo(policy, exynos_info->freq_table); }
With the recent changes in cpufreq core, we just need to set mask of all possible cpus into policy->cpus. Rest would be done by core. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> --- drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c | 14 +------------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 13 deletions(-)