On Saturday, November 17, 2012 03:50:48 PM Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 02:13:38PM -0500, Mark Langsdorf wrote:
> > Although cpufreq_driver has a flag field, no part of cpufreq_driver
> > is directly passed to the cpufreq_stat code. Only cpufreq_policy
> > is. It's cleaner to do passes of the while loop than to copy the
> > cpufreq_driver.flag field into cpufreq_policy and then store it again
> > in cpufreq_stats.
> 
> That maybe so but this newly added loop which is only Calxeda-relevant
> is called in cpufreq_stat_notifier_trans, which is the frequency change
> notifier call, AFAICT.
> 
> So each cpufreq driver will be paying that small and needless penalty
> now for nothing and on each frequency change. Which adds to the
> kernel-wide bloat and we absolutely don't want that.
> 
> So you probably need to find a slick way of detecting calxeda hw
> somewhere along the init path of cpufreq_stats_init and set a
> hw-specific flag instead of adding that cost to each driver.

Mark, I suppose you'd like me to take this series for v3.8, but the above
comment from Boris has to be addressed for that.

Thanks,
Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.