Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 3 Feb 2016 07:52:34 +0530 | From | Viresh Kumar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/5] cpufreq: governors: Solve the ABBA lockups |
| |
On 02-02-16, 21:04, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: > > Hi Rafael, > > > > Sorry for doing this, I know you were also looking to fix this in a > > possibly different way. But I thought, it would be better if we fix > > that. We can scrap this version and take yours if that looks better. > > That's not nice to be honest. At the very least you could have asked > me about the status of my work before sending this.
I started looking into this yesterday morning, while you were away and finished it before you came back. So, it would have taken more time and so I just sent them. I don't have any issues (as mentioned earlier) is discarding them for the work you might have already done.
> Fortunately, though, when I started to look deeper into fixing this > problem I thought I didn't like the overall design of things in the > governor land, so I started to change that and my modifications turn > out to be sort of complementary with respect to this patchset.
That's good.
> Of > course, they do conflict, but I can redo my patches on top of these if > that's necessary.
Yeah, even I don't have any issues in rebasing over your work, if I have to.
> That said I'm going to post them in their current > form anyway, at least to show the direction I want to take going > forward.
Sure.
> > I thought, perhaps the best way to fix it is to give separate sysfs-ops > > to governors. And that's what I did. > > Yes, that's what I was talking about in the other thread.
I must have missed that then :(
> My overall impression here is that the code changes make sense. Some > details need to be improved (like the concurrent ->store for governor > tunables pointed out by Juri).
> The patch changelogs suck, though.
Like always :(
> If your hope was that this might go into 4.5, there is a small chance > of that happening, but only if it can be made ready this week.
Will try my best.
> Otherwise, I'd prefer it to be redone on top of my changes.
No worries.
> Let me comment on the individual patches.
Thanks for taking this up Rafael, really appreciate it :)
-- viresh
| |