Re: [PATCH 3/3] cpufreq: Remove unnecessary use of policy->shared_type

[Santosh Shilimkar]

Viresh,

On Friday 01 February 2013 02:22 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> On Friday 01 February 2013 01:32 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 1 February 2013 13:03, Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > I am not talking about just notifiers. This is for external users who
> > > has subscribed for notifiers. The point is whether the core CPUFReq
> > > gets updated without that flag for all affected CPU.
> >
> > Yes, its safe. Follow this thread, yesterday i explained this to
> > Tomasz Figa:
> >
> > http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg221629.html
> That part was very clear to me Viresh. Anyway thanks for the link.
>  From what I read so far, it might just work but I would want to
> try it out before acking the approach.
You are correct. Sorry for oversight on your initial point about the
usage of the flag. When I added that flag, I just went by the
description thinking the cpufreq core booking and stat updates
use the flag. Its not the case.

Thanks for the fix. For the patch,
Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx>
--
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/