Re: [PATCH 5/6] cpufreq: governor: replace per-cpu delayed work with timers

From: Viresh Kumar
Date: Mon Nov 30 2015 - 08:35:57 EST


On 30-11-15, 13:05, Lucas Stach wrote:
> I don't want to block this patch on that, but maybe as a thought for
> further consideration: Wouldn't it make sense to use a single unbound
> deferrable work item for this? There was some work to make this possible
> already: "timer: make deferrable cpu unbound timers really not bound to
> a cpu"

Yes, it would be sensible but that work has gone nowhere since April.
Once that is merged, we can think about it.

--
viresh
--
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/