From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/7] cpufreq: Merge cpufreq_offline_prepare/finish routines Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 17:16:33 +0530 Message-ID: <20160211114633.GB28558@vireshk> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f182.google.com ([209.85.192.182]:34156 "EHLO mail-pf0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751118AbcBKLqg (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:46:36 -0500 Received: by mail-pf0-f182.google.com with SMTP id x65so28404328pfb.1 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 03:46:36 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Rafael Wysocki , Juri Lelli , Lists linaro-kernel , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Shilpasri G Bhat , Linux Kernel Mailing List On 11-02-16, 02:15, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > And one question tangentially related to this patch: Would it be > possible to avoid calling __cpufreq_governor(_EXIT) for CPU offline? > > The fact that we still carry out the whole governor teardown at that > point is slightly disturbing, as in theory it should be possible to > keep the governor attributes in place across offline/online. Will think about that after the current code is stable a bit. It should be possible, but need to see if it is worth it. -- viresh