From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753783Ab3H0VJv (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Aug 2013 17:09:51 -0400 Received: from hydra.sisk.pl ([212.160.235.94]:37719 "EHLO hydra.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752639Ab3H0VJt convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Aug 2013 17:09:49 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Lan Tianyu Cc: Viresh Kumar , Lists linaro-kernel , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "cpufreq@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [Query] CPUFreq: Why do we need policy->user_policy? Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 23:20:32 +0200 Message-ID: <1734682.b8u1f0b3XY@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.10.5 (Linux/3.11.0-rc6+; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday, August 27, 2013 10:04:52 PM Lan Tianyu wrote: > 2013/8/27 Viresh Kumar : > > On 26 August 2013 20:53, Lan Tianyu wrote: > >> So far as I know, it stores some user's config and cpufreq_update_policy() > >> bases on the data in the struct to start a new policy. Cpu thermal driver > >> （/driver/thermal/cpu_cooling.c）also will its value to update freq policy > >> when receive a cpufreq policy adjust notification. > > > > Yeah, but how are these different from policy->min/max/policy/governor? > > Why do we need to replicate this information? > > From my understanding.policy->min/max may be modified by some drivers > but the user_policy only store user space config and should not be changed > by other reason. :) Yes, that was the original idea IIRC, so separate user settings from stuff that may be changed internally by the kernel. Thanks, Rafael