This series contains a set of cleanups around cpufreq frequency table
handling.

The first patch drops the redundant @freq_table parameter from
cpufreq_frequency_table_verify(). This has already been Acked, but is
included here to avoid build issues with the following changes.

The second patch makes sure that policy limits are always enforced
even when a driver does not provide a frequency table. This removes
the implicit dependency on the table and makes the enforcement logic
consistent across drivers.

The third patch makes cpufreq_frequency_table_verify() internal,
since no external user should call it directly after the parameter
removal and the refactoring.

Together these patches simplify the API surface, reduce redundancy,
and make policy enforcement more robust.

Zihuan Zhang (3):
  cpufreq: Drop redundant freq_table parameter
  cpufreq: Always enforce policy limits even without frequency table
  cpufreq: Make cpufreq_frequency_table_verify() internal

 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c         |  2 +-
 drivers/cpufreq/freq_table.c      | 18 +++++++-----------
 drivers/cpufreq/sh-cpufreq.c      |  8 ++------
 drivers/cpufreq/virtual-cpufreq.c |  5 +----
 include/linux/cpufreq.h           |  5 +----
 5 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)

-- 
2.25.1

On 04-09-25, 11:22, Zihuan Zhang wrote:
> This series contains a set of cleanups around cpufreq frequency table
> handling.
> 
> The first patch drops the redundant @freq_table parameter from
> cpufreq_frequency_table_verify(). This has already been Acked, but is
> included here to avoid build issues with the following changes.

Yeah, this is not okay. You are resending an earlier patch, which is
already Acked as V1 now. You could have just mentioned the link to the
dependency patch here, and that's all.

Don't mix things like this, it doesn't look nice.

-- 
viresh

在 2025/9/4 12:24, Viresh Kumar 写道:
> On 04-09-25, 11:22, Zihuan Zhang wrote:
>> This series contains a set of cleanups around cpufreq frequency table
>> handling.
>>
>> The first patch drops the redundant @freq_table parameter from
>> cpufreq_frequency_table_verify(). This has already been Acked, but is
>> included here to avoid build issues with the following changes.
> Yeah, this is not okay. You are resending an earlier patch, which is
> already Acked as V1 now. You could have just mentioned the link to the
> dependency patch here, and that's all.
>
> Don't mix things like this, it doesn't look nice.
>

Thanks for clarifying, Viresh.


I wasn’t aware that I could just reference the earlier Acked patch as a
dependency instead of resending it. Your suggestion makes perfect sense,
and I will do that in future submissions.

Sorry for the noise, and thanks again for the guidance!