lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [CHECKER] Implementation inconsistencies involving writes
On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 08:54:15PM -0700, Ken Ashcraft wrote:
> I'm trying to cross check implementations of the same interface for
> errors. I assume that if functions are assigned to the same function
> pointer, they are implementations of a common interface and should be
> consistent with each other.

> [BUG] <linux@brodo.de> not writing policy->governor. looks like it is
> necessary to write a default value there.

It surely _looks like_ it's a bug, but it isn't. cpufreq drivers can either
have a "->target" or a "->setpolicy" function defined in the cpufreq_driver
struct. If it's ->target, ->governor needs to be set, if it's ->setpolicy,
->governor may not be set, or at least should not be set. As there's only
one ->setpolicy cpufreq driver (longrun), it's not as clear as it should be.

The difference between target and setpolicy cpufreq drivers is the
following: on the first type, the CPU can be set to run at a specific
frequency. setpolicy drivers can set the CPU to a frequency range; the CPU
itself at which frequency to run within this range -- an interesting feature
of Transmeta CPUs, which made this distinction necessary.

Dominik
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.040 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site