Re: [PATCH 2/4] sched: cpufreq: Keep track of cpufreq utilization update flags

[Joel Fernandes]

Hi Viresh,

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 7:12 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 18-12-17, 12:14, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
>> For example, swithing from:
>>
>>  - void (*func)(struct update_util_data *data, u64 time,
>>  -              unsigned int flags))
>>  + void (*func)(struct update_util_data *data, u64 time,
>>  +              unsigned int flags, bool set))
>>
>> Where the additional boolean is actually used to define which
>> operation we wanna perform on the flags?
>
> The code will eventually have the same complexity or ugliness in both
> the cases. I would like to start with another flag for now and see if
> people prefer another parameter.

Though I think that will solve Rafael's concern of polluting the flags
for something schedutil specific. I also feel adding extra callback
parameter is cleaner than 2 new clear flags.

Thanks,

- Joel