Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1330898 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v2 1/10] cpufreq: Clean up default and fallback governor setup

Started byGautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
First post2016-02-10 06:20 +0100
Last post2016-02-10 06:50 +0100
Articles 2 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH v2 1/10] cpufreq: Clean up default and fallback governor  setup Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-02-10 06:20 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v2 1/10] cpufreq: Clean up default and fallback governor  setup Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-02-10 06:50 +0100

#1330898 — Re: [PATCH v2 1/10] cpufreq: Clean up default and fallback governor setup

FromGautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date2016-02-10 06:20 +0100
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/10] cpufreq: Clean up default and fallback governor setup
Message-ID<r0vm2-6f8-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Hello Rafael,

On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 03:11:54AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
[..snip..]
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_performance.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_performance.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_performance.c
> @@ -33,10 +33,7 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_performance(
>  	return 0;
>  }
> 
> -#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE_MODULE
> -static
> -#endif
> -struct cpufreq_governor cpufreq_gov_performance = {
> +static struct cpufreq_governor cpufreq_gov_performance = {
>  	.name		= "performance",
>  	.governor	= cpufreq_governor_performance,
>  	.owner		= THIS_MODULE,
> @@ -52,6 +49,19 @@ static void __exit cpufreq_gov_performan
>  	cpufreq_unregister_governor(&cpufreq_gov_performance);
>  }
> 
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE
> +struct cpufreq_governor *cpufreq_default_governor(void)
> +{
> +	return &cpufreq_gov_performance;
> +}
> +#endif
> +#ifndef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE_MODULE

Shouldn't this be #ifdef ?

> +struct cpufreq_governor *cpufreq_fallback_governor(void)
> +{
> +	return &cpufreq_gov_performance;
> +}
> +#endif


--
Thanks and Regards
gautham.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1330908

FromGautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date2016-02-10 06:50 +0100
Message-ID<r0vP3-6uj-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1330898
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 10:45:14AM +0530, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> Hello Rafael,
> 
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 03:11:54AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> [..snip..]
> > Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_performance.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_performance.c
> > +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_performance.c
> > @@ -33,10 +33,7 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_performance(
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> > 
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE_MODULE
> > -static
> > -#endif
> > -struct cpufreq_governor cpufreq_gov_performance = {
> > +static struct cpufreq_governor cpufreq_gov_performance = {
> >  	.name		= "performance",
> >  	.governor	= cpufreq_governor_performance,
> >  	.owner		= THIS_MODULE,
> > @@ -52,6 +49,19 @@ static void __exit cpufreq_gov_performan
> >  	cpufreq_unregister_governor(&cpufreq_gov_performance);
> >  }
> > 
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE
> > +struct cpufreq_governor *cpufreq_default_governor(void)
> > +{
> > +	return &cpufreq_gov_performance;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE_MODULE
> 
> Shouldn't this be #ifdef ?

Never mind! Shouldn't be reviewing patches first thing in the morning!

--
Thanks and Regards
gautham.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web