All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: rjw@sisk.pl, swarren@wwwdotorg.org,
	linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org,
	cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] cpufreq: don't update policy->cpu while removing while removing other CPUs
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 13:43:41 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <523177B5.2050007@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0475c234b6ca2849c8a69dad0446d82b065b4161.1378963070.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

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@linaro.org>
> ---
>  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) {
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2013-09-12  8:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-09-12  5:25 [PATCH 0/5] cpufreq: Last minute fixes for 3.12 Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 1/5] cpufreq: Remove extra blank line Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:16   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12 10:08     ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 2/5] cpufreq: don't break string in print statements Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:11   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 3/5] cpufreq: remove __cpufreq_remove_dev() Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:09   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 4/5] cpufreq: don't update policy->cpu while removing while removing other CPUs Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:13   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat [this message]
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 5/5] cpufreq: use correct values of cpus in __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish() Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  6:40   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  6:47     ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  6:56       ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  7:16         ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  9:21           ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 10:47             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-12 10:43               ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 10:56                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-12 10:49                   ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 18:08             ` Stephen Warren
2013-09-17 15:20   ` Stephen Warren
2013-09-17 16:18     ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-17 18:43       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-18  4:31       ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 10:05 ` [PATCH 0/5] cpufreq: Last minute fixes for 3.12 Viresh Kumar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=523177B5.2050007@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=patches@linaro.org \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.