Re: [PATCH 0/8] cpufreq: Auto-register with energy model

From: Viresh Kumar
Date: Wed Aug 11 2021 - 01:34:17 EST

On 11-08-21, 10:48, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 10-08-21, 13:35, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > This series adds more code than it removes,
> Sadly yes :(
> > and the unregistration is
> > not a fix as we don't ever remove the EM tables by design, so not sure
> > either of these points are valid arguments.
> I think that design needs to be looked over again, it looks broken to
> me everytime I land onto this code. I wonder why we don't unregister
> stuff.

Coming back to this series. We have two options, based on what I
proposed here:

1. Let cpufreq core register with EM on behalf of cpufreq drivers.

2. Update drivers to use ->ready() callback to do this stuff.

I am fine with both :)