linux-pm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: rjw@sisk.pl, swarren@wwwdotorg.org,
	linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org,
	cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] cpufreq: don't update policy->cpu while removing while removing other CPUs
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 13:43:41 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <523177B5.2050007@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0475c234b6ca2849c8a69dad0446d82b065b4161.1378963070.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

On 09/12/2013 10:55 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> With a recent change the logic here is changed a bit and I just figured out it
> is something we don't want.
> 
> Consider we have four CPUs (0,1,2,3) managed by a policy and policy->cpu is set
> to 0. Now we are suspending and hence we call __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare() for
> cpu 1, 2 & 3..
> 
> With the current code we always call cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu() for cpu
> 1, 2 & 3 whereas we should skipped most of __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare()
> routine.
> 
> Lets fix it by moving the check for !frozen inside the first if block.
> 

As you noted in the other thread, Rafael already applied my patch[1] which does
the same thing. So I guess you'll drop this patch from your series.

[1].http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/commit/?h=bleeding-edge&id=61173f256

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat

> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 5e0a82e..0e11fcb 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1182,8 +1182,9 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(struct device *dev,
>  		cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus);
>  	unlock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu);
> 
> -	if (cpu != policy->cpu && !frozen) {
> -		sysfs_remove_link(&dev->kobj, "cpufreq");
> +	if (cpu != policy->cpu) {
> +		if (!frozen)
> +			sysfs_remove_link(&dev->kobj, "cpufreq");
>  	} else if (cpus > 1) {
>  		new_cpu = cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu(policy, cpu, frozen);
>  		if (new_cpu >= 0) {
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2013-09-12  8:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-09-12  5:25 [PATCH 0/5] cpufreq: Last minute fixes for 3.12 Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 1/5] cpufreq: Remove extra blank line Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:16   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12 10:08     ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 2/5] cpufreq: don't break string in print statements Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:11   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 3/5] cpufreq: remove __cpufreq_remove_dev() Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:09   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 4/5] cpufreq: don't update policy->cpu while removing while removing other CPUs Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:13   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat [this message]
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 5/5] cpufreq: use correct values of cpus in __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish() Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  6:40   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  6:47     ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  6:56       ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  7:16         ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  9:21           ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 10:47             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-12 10:43               ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 10:56                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-12 10:49                   ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 18:08             ` Stephen Warren
2013-09-17 15:20   ` Stephen Warren
2013-09-17 16:18     ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-17 18:43       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-18  4:31       ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 10:05 ` [PATCH 0/5] cpufreq: Last minute fixes for 3.12 Viresh Kumar

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=523177B5.2050007@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=patches@linaro.org \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).