[PATCH] cpufreq 2.4 interface removal schedule

From: Greg KH
Date: Wed Mar 09 2005 - 21:57:13 EST

ChangeSet 1.2037, 2005/03/09 09:32:00-08:00, linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[PATCH] cpufreq 2.4 interface removal schedule

Even though these 2.4. interfaces are already gone in Dave Jones' cpufreq
bitkeeper tree, here's a patch which properly announces it in

Add meaningful content concerning the removal of deprecated interfaces to
the cpufreq core.

Signed-off-by: Dominik Brodowski <linux@xxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@xxxxxxxxx>

Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt | 14 +++++++++++---
1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff -Nru a/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt b/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt
--- a/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt 2005-03-09 16:30:09 -08:00
+++ b/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt 2005-03-09 16:30:09 -08:00
@@ -17,10 +17,18 @@


-What: /proc/sys/cpu and the sysctl interface to cpufreq (2.4.x interfaces)
+What: /proc/sys/cpu/*, sysctl and /proc/cpufreq interfaces to cpufreq (2.4.x interfaces)
When: January 2005
Files: drivers/cpufreq/: cpufreq_userspace.c, proc_intf.c
- function calls throughout the kernel tree
-Why: Deprecated, has been replaced/superseded by (what?)....
+Why: /proc/sys/cpu/* has been deprecated since inclusion of cpufreq into
+ the main kernel tree. It bloats /proc/ unnecessarily and doesn't work
+ well with the "governor"-based design of cpufreq.
+ /proc/cpufreq/* has also been deprecated for a long time and was only
+ meant for usage during 2.5. until the new sysfs-based interface became
+ ready. It has an inconsistent interface which doesn't work well with
+ userspace setting the frequency. The output from /proc/cpufreq/* can
+ be emulated using "cpufreq-info --proc" (cpufrequtils).
+ Both interfaces are superseded by the cpufreq interface in
+ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu%n/cpufreq/.
Who: Dominik Brodowski <linux@xxxxxxxx>

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/