Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] cpufreq: tegra124: Remove use of disable_cpufreq

Aaron Kling
2025-05-28T17:29:31Z

On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 5:02 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 20-05-25, 10:53, Jon Hunter wrote:
> > I understand, but this seems odd. It would be odd that the device may just
> > disappear after resuming from suspend if it fails to resume. I have not seen
> > this done for other drivers that fail to resume. Presumably this is not the
> > only CPU Freq driver that could fail to resume either?
> >
> > It makes the code messy because now we have more than one place where the
> > device could be unregistered.
>
> Fair enough.
>
> This driver, along with other cpufreq drivers, can fail at multiple
> places during suspend/resume (and other operations). If something goes
> wrong, we print an error to inform the user. Should we avoid doing
> anything else (like everyone else) ? i.e. Just remove the call to
> disable_cpufreq(), as all later calls will fail anyway.
>
> This is the only driver that behaves differently on failures.
>
> --
> viresh

Is there any consensus on the best way to handle this? I'd like to
keep the series moving.

Sincerely,
Aaron