Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix some problems for cpufreq

[Wang Weidong]

On 2014/12/2 12:38, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 30 November 2014 at 13:53, Wang Weidong <wangweidong1@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> No, there are not utilities and scripts relying on it.
> 
> How can you be so sure about it ? There might be scripts/utils you
> aren't aware of
> and are depending on this..
> 
>> I just confuse that:
>> If the policy->min and policy-max is changed while it shows all available freqs
>> though scaling_available_frequencies. I can't set all freq-steps, only [policy->min, policy->max].
>> why should it show all the available freqs.
> 
> That's not the only purpose of those frequencies there. It shows list
> of all possible
> frequencies. Now, there can be issues if those lists are updated.
> 
> Suppose somebody just played with the min/max frequency, now how would anybody
> come to know about the frequencies available above/below the
> user-max/min frequency?
> 
> So as you mentioned in your example above: User space would never know about
> 
> 1.05 Ghz and 2.3GHz anymore.. Unless you remember it or save it somewhere.
> 

Nice, Thanks for your reply.

Got it.

Wang,
Regards

>> Although, it doesn't impact on us. So just ignore the patch#2. :)
> 
> Probably yes.
> 
> 


--
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/