On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:44:20AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 17-06-20, 13:47, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > This is first step towards avoiding polling based cpufreq set if firmware > > has fast access registers that bypass normal mailbox based messaging. > > > > If you happy with this and provide ack, I will take this along with scmi > > changes via ARM SoC. Hope that is fine by you. > > Sudeep, > > I am not sure how it concerns me frankly :) >
Sorry I wasn't clear. > AFAICT, this is enabling fast switch based on some mechanism (internal > to scmi) and so either the cpufreq driver will have fast-switch > enabled or not, and both are fine by the cpufreq core. > Indeed. > And so I am confused on why my Ack is important here :) > Generally ARM SoC team expects a stamp from other subsystem maintainers if they are pulling it. I understand there is more firmware aspect than cpufreq aspect here, but still we may need your stamp to this 😉 for logistic reasons. -- Regards, Sudeep
