lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] drivers: Frequency constraint infrastructure
On 30-01-19, 10:55, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 17-01-19, 14:16, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > I was also wondering how this new framework is dealing with
> > constraints/request imposed/generated by the scheduler and related
> > interfaces (thinking about schedutil and Patrick's util_clamp).
>
> I am not very sure about what constraints are imposed by schedutil or
> util-clamp stuff that may not work well with this stuff.
>
> As you are already aware of it, this series isn't doing anything new
> as we already have thermal/user constraints available in kernel. I am
> just trying to implement a better way to present those to the cpufreq
> core.

@Juri: Ping.

--
viresh

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-02-08 10:09    [W:0.164 / U:0.636 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site