From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 14/14] cpufreq: Add support for physical hoplug of CPUs Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 07:41:07 +0530 Message-ID: <20150518021107.GA5102@linux> References: <3771347.4CYzBDSQ1Q@vostro.rjw.lan> <20150516021307.GE4600@linux> <6810633.U8XLCHe8Cd@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pd0-f175.google.com ([209.85.192.175]:35022 "EHLO mail-pd0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750765AbbERCLM (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 May 2015 22:11:12 -0400 Received: by pdea3 with SMTP id a3so126419287pde.2 for ; Sun, 17 May 2015 19:11:11 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6810633.U8XLCHe8Cd@vostro.rjw.lan> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, sboyd@codeaurora.org, prarit@redhat.com, skannan@codeaurora.org, Srivatsa Bhat On 18-05-15, 02:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Well, if the sysfs directories are removed on every offline, then in particular > they will be removed when the device is physically going away, so it should > actually work (unless we've broken it already and nobody noticed). The problem is that the remove routine is called twice and I thought it might not be safe to call it twice. Ofcourse I missed the cpu_offline() checks in the sysfs removal path. > If you want to keep them around after offline, you need to become careful > about the "physical hot-remove" case at the same time (and not several patches > later). Sure, will do that today. -- viresh