From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Jones Subject: RE: ondemand vs suspend. Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 23:08:42 -0400 Message-ID: <1150254522.16845.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: cpufreq-bounces@lists.linux.org.uk Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=m.gmane.org+glkc-cpufreq=m.gmane.org@lists.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" Cc: Dave Jones , cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 19:50 -0700, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote: > Yes. I am able to reproduce this 2.6.17-rc6 and trying to narrow it > down. > > Also, there is a known issue with ondemand and resuming anyway as the > second CPU will not be able to resume with ondemand, but instead will go > back to 'default' governor on initialization. > So, even with this bug fixed, we cannot suspend-resume with ondemand > governor. Workaround for now can be just to switch to default governor > before suspend and go back to ondemand after resume, using initscripts. Yeah, that's what I implemented for our pm utils earlier today. -- Peter