From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755477AbcETAlD (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 19 May 2016 20:41:03 -0400
Received: from mail-pf0-f178.google.com ([209.85.192.178]:33062 "EHLO
	mail-pf0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1754988AbcETAlA (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 19 May 2016 20:41:00 -0400
From: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org>
X-Google-Original-From: Steve Muckle <smuckle@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 17:40:56 -0700
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@arm.com>,
        Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] cpufreq: schedutil: do not update rate limit ts when
 freq is unchanged
Message-ID: <20160520004056.GE15383@graphite.smuckle.net>
References: <1462828814-32530-1-git-send-email-smuckle@linaro.org>
 <1462828814-32530-6-git-send-email-smuckle@linaro.org>
 <CAJZ5v0iwz3d6dxY-sUxbU8q1EzcO0gKX1pp-rDb8Www46Fg1uw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160519194635.GG17223@graphite.smuckle.net>
 <CAJZ5v0gF07sox1+84eLeYPK6Ksj26s7iKU6zc=+pMOQimwUYog@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160519233408.GC15383@graphite.smuckle.net>
 <CAJZ5v0gL0xe7P7jZ=EZtFaSzE5n3ECa+tnTf0R2Th7xrB=9PgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJZ5v0i0AGZVEYgJzDRVJHqCjAGDXhCeQ4gJBn77z_5cCh2Mqg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0i0AGZVEYgJzDRVJHqCjAGDXhCeQ4gJBn77z_5cCh2Mqg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 02:37:17AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Also I think that it would be good to avoid walking the frequency
> table twice in case we end up wanting to update the frequency after
> all.  With the [4/5] we'd do it once in get_next_freq() and then once
> more in cpufreq_driver_fast_switch(), for example, and walking the
> frequency table may be more expensive that doing the switch in the
> first place.

If a driver API is added to return the platform frequency associated
with a target frequency, what do you think about requiring the
fast_switch API to take a target-supported frequency?