Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] cpufreq: provide data for frequency-invariant load-tracking support

From: Viresh Kumar
Date: Tue Jul 11 2017 - 02:01:16 EST

On 10-07-17, 13:02, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> Yes, I will change this. The #define approach is not really necessary
> here since we're not in the scheduler hot-path and inlining is not
> really required here.

It would be part of scheduler hot-path for the fast-switching case, isn't it ?
(I am not arguing against using weak functions, just wanted to correct above