Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] cpufreq: Specify default governor on command line

From: Quentin Perret <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 12:53:18 +0100

On Thursday 25 Jun 2020 at 13:44:34 (+0200), Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 1:36 PM Viresh Kumar <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > This change is not right IMO. This part handles the set-policy case,
> > where there are no governors. Right now this code, for some reasons
> > unknown to me, forcefully uses the default governor set to indicate
> > the policy, which is not a great idea in my opinion TBH. This doesn't
> > and shouldn't care about governor modules and should only be looking
> > at strings instead of governor pointer.
> 
> Sounds right.
> 
> > Rafael, I even think we should remove this code completely and just
> > rely on what the driver has sent to us. Using the selected governor
> > for set policy drivers is very confusing and also we shouldn't be
> > forced to compiling any governor for the set-policy case.
> 
> Well, AFAICS the idea was to use the default governor as a kind of
> default policy proxy, but I agree that strings should be sufficient
> for that.

I agree with all the above. I'd much rather not rely on the default
governor name to populate the default policy, too, so +1 from me.

Thanks,
Quentin