On Sat, 12 Nov 2005, Raj, Ashok wrote:
> >
> >Ashok was my patch for the cpufreq driver *that* horrible? Or perhaps
> we
> >just need to move things like the set_cpus_allowed further up in the
> calls
> >and handle everything in one location. Interested?
> >
>
> I have been on to multiple things recently, I think I saw your post, but
> didn't look at it closer.
>
> Yes, moving things higher up would definitely help, especially the
> set_cpus_allowed().
>
> We should also do the same for the case where we have the list of
> dependent cpus in the mask before calling the lower level functions.
>
> Zwane, if you want to take a shot at it, that would be awesome.. I might
> not be able to get to this immediately.
Urgh making it generic turned out to be fairly complicated due to the
number of sleeping calls done from the lowlevel drivers and handling the
disabling and enabling of preemption just got too ugly.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
