From: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
To: cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] If max_freq got reduced (e.g. by _PPC) a write to sysfs scaling_governor let cpufreq core stuck at low max_freq for ever
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 14:53:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200604041453.25890.trenn@suse.de> (raw)
Subject: Max freq stucks at low freq if reduced by _PPC and sysfs gov access
The problem is reproducable by(if machine is limiting freqs via BIOS):
- Unplugging AC -> max freq gets limited
- echo ${governor} >/sys/.../cpufreq/scaling_governor (policy->user_data.max
gets overridden with policy->max and will never come up again.)
This patch exchanges the cpufreq_set_policy call to __cpufreq_set_policy
in store_scaling_governor and duplicates most of it's functionality but does
not override user_data.max.
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Signed-off-by: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
Index: linux-2.6.16/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ linux-2.6.16/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -402,7 +402,7 @@ static ssize_t show_scaling_governor (st
return -EINVAL;
}
-
+static int __cpufreq_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *data, struct cpufreq_policy *policy);
/**
* store_scaling_governor - store policy for the specified CPU
*/
@@ -413,19 +413,34 @@ static ssize_t store_scaling_governor (s
char str_governor[16];
struct cpufreq_policy new_policy;
+ mutex_lock(&policy->lock);
ret = cpufreq_get_policy(&new_policy, policy->cpu);
if (ret)
- return ret;
+ goto error;
ret = sscanf (buf, "%15s", str_governor);
- if (ret != 1)
- return -EINVAL;
+ if (ret != 1){
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ goto error;
+ }
- if (cpufreq_parse_governor(str_governor, &new_policy.policy, &new_policy.governor))
- return -EINVAL;
+ if (cpufreq_parse_governor(str_governor, &new_policy.policy, &new_policy.governor)){
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ goto error;
+ }
+ /* Do not use cpufreq_set_policy here or the user_policy.max
+ will be wrongly overridden */
+ ret = __cpufreq_set_policy(policy, &new_policy);
+
+ policy->user_policy.policy = policy->policy;
+ policy->user_policy.governor = policy->governor;
+ mutex_unlock(&policy->lock);
+ cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
- ret = cpufreq_set_policy(&new_policy);
return ret ? ret : count;
+ error:
+ mutex_unlock(&policy->lock);
+ return ret;
}
/**
next reply other threads:[~2006-04-04 12:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-04-04 12:53 Thomas Renninger [this message]
2006-04-13 13:14 ` [PATCH] If max_freq got reduced (e.g. by _PPC) a write to sysfs scaling_governor let cpufreq core stuck at low max_freq for ever Thomas Renninger
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-04-14 21:27 Pallipadi, Venkatesh
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=200604041453.25890.trenn@suse.de \
--to=trenn@suse.de \
--cc=cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox