Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq Fixes for 3.9

From: Dirk Brandewie
Date: Fri Feb 08 2013 - 19:09:00 EST

On 02/08/2013 03:56 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, February 08, 2013 09:02:37 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, February 08, 2013 08:06:52 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 8 February 2013 18:02, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
So as I said, please rework the fixes on top of linux-pm.git/pm-cpufreq.

I already did. Please check for-rafael branch

Cool. This is the one I'm supposed to apply, then?

OK, applied to bleeding-edge. Hopefully it will be build-tested over the
weekend and I can move it to linux-next.

I dropped the rwlock/RCU patches from Nathan, though, because I had some
doubts about the correctness of the RCU one and the rwlock one alone would
conflict with your further changes.

One piece of fallout from dropping Nathan patches I had rebased mine on top of them.

This fixes the breakage do you want me to spin my patches or send this separately?:

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index 0ebdf8c..a008b8e 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1024,7 +1024,7 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev(struct device *dev, struct
__cpufreq_governor(data, CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP);

- if (!driver->setpolicy)
+ if (!cpufreq_driver->setpolicy)
strncpy(per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_governor, cpu),
data->governor->name, CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN);
@@ -1771,7 +1771,7 @@ int cpufreq_update_policy(unsigned int cpu)
pr_debug("Driver did not initialize current freq");
data->cur = policy.cur;
} else {
- if (data->cur != policy.cur && driver->target)
+ if (data->cur != policy.cur && cpufreq_driver->target)
cpufreq_out_of_sync(cpu, data->cur,

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at