Re: [PATCH 4/5] cpufreq: don't update policy->cpu while removingwhile removing other CPUs

From: Srivatsa S. Bhat
Date: Thu Sep 12 2013 - 04:17:45 EST


On 09/12/2013 10:55 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> With a recent change the logic here is changed a bit and I just figured out it
> is something we don't want.
>
> Consider we have four CPUs (0,1,2,3) managed by a policy and policy->cpu is set
> to 0. Now we are suspending and hence we call __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare() for
> cpu 1, 2 & 3..
>
> With the current code we always call cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu() for cpu
> 1, 2 & 3 whereas we should skipped most of __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare()
> routine.
>
> Lets fix it by moving the check for !frozen inside the first if block.
>

As you noted in the other thread, Rafael already applied my patch[1] which does
the same thing. So I guess you'll drop this patch from your series.

[1].http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/commit/?h=bleeding-edge&id=61173f256

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat

> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 5e0a82e..0e11fcb 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1182,8 +1182,9 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(struct device *dev,
> cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus);
> unlock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu);
>
> - if (cpu != policy->cpu && !frozen) {
> - sysfs_remove_link(&dev->kobj, "cpufreq");
> + if (cpu != policy->cpu) {
> + if (!frozen)
> + sysfs_remove_link(&dev->kobj, "cpufreq");
> } else if (cpus > 1) {
> new_cpu = cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu(policy, cpu, frozen);
> if (new_cpu >= 0) {
>


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/