From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Jones Subject: Re: [Patch] CPUFREQ: Add the suspend/resume flag to avoid smp_call in cpufreq_suspend/resume Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:49:18 -0400 Message-ID: <20090724014918.GA8854@redhat.com> References: <1248399463.3556.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:53261 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751342AbZGXBtV (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:49:21 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1248399463.3556.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: ykzhao Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 09:37:43AM +0800, ykzhao wrote: > Subject: [CPUFREQ]: Add the suspend/resume flag to avoid smp_call in cpufreq_suspend/resume > From: Zhao Yakui > > Only CPU0 is available in course of cpufreq_suspend/resume. > So it is unnecessary to do the smp_call for getting the current > cpufreq. > > Add a flag of suspend/resume to avoid the smp_call in course of > cpufreq_suspend/resume. > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13781 > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13269 > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Yakui > Tested-by: Christian Casteyde All this goes away if we just made that suspend/resume code conditional on powerpc as previously discussed. We don't need any of it on x86 afaict Dave