On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org wrote:
On 19 August 2013 11:46, amit daniel kachhap amit.daniel@samsung.com wrote:
I meant that something like 2 policies can be registered SCALE_DIRECT/STEPS. if SCALE_DIRECT is registered than target will be called with exact frequency. SCALE_STEPS will behave as currently happening. This way target_index api may not be needed. But looks like Rafael and others are fine with your approach so you can ignore this :)
Why wouldn't we need target_index in case of SCALE_DIRECT? All target_index is doing now is changing platform specific registers to configure an exact frequency reported by index..
Actually target index will still be re-calculated if the platform target driver wants to retrieve the index from the valid frequency or directly set the valid frequency in the clock controller. So I wanted a simpler/quicker cpufreq_frequency_table_target which just returns the matching index from the valid frequency.
linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel