From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Set policy to non-NULL only after all hotplug online work is done
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 12:20:26 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <530E4C8A.6060906@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKohpo==WVKytPCaMk=O5rGfPNFDAF7ffYo7OE0d3uAPyJfwwA@mail.gmail.com>
On 02/25/2014 10:02 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 26 February 2014 07:18, Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> On 02/25/2014 02:41 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
>>> And is "fully initialized" actually well defined?
>>
>> The point in add dev/hot plug path after which we will no longer change
>> policy fields without sending further CPUFREQ_UPDATE_POLICY_CPU /
>> CPUFRE_NOTIFY notifiers.
>
> Okay..
>
>> Pretty much the end of __cpufreq_add_dev() so that it's after:
>> - cpufreq_init_policy()
>> - And the update of userpolicy fields that after thie init call
>
> No. In that case it can be considered initialized before cpufreq_init_policy().
> As we do send CPUFREQ_NOTIFY after that from cpufreq_init_policy()->
> cpufreq_set_policy().
Ok, valid hole in my definition of "fully initialized".
>
> There are two types of fields within policy, some are very basic: cpu/min/max/
> affected_cpus/related_cpus
>
> some are advanced: sysfs/governors/..
>
> And as a rule you have to get policy->rwsem lock before accessing policy
> members. We might not have followed it very well for small things like cpu.
>
> And so if you are doing anything over that, please use a lock and that is
> already present in cpufreq_update_policy().
>
> With my latest patchset that I sent yesterday, locking is improved and now
> a policy will be usable only after the rwsem is released. And that should be
> fine. And so making it available in the per-cpu variable after all the necessary
> fields are filled looks fine to me. And so I don't think we need to move it
> after call to cpufreq_init_policy(maybe a better name to this function is
> required)..
I'll take a closer look. Internal tree cpufreq code is in 3.12, so
back-porting all the cpufreq changes and testing it can take a bit of
time. Will get back on this.
-Saravana
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-26 20:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-24 6:57 [PATCH] cpufreq: Set policy to non-NULL only after all hotplug online work is done Saravana Kannan
2014-02-24 7:42 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-02-24 8:11 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-02-24 8:41 ` skannan
2014-02-24 8:43 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-02-24 8:47 ` skannan
2014-02-24 8:50 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-02-24 9:00 ` skannan
2014-02-24 8:39 ` skannan
2014-02-24 10:55 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-02-24 20:23 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-02-25 8:50 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-02-25 13:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-02-25 14:40 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-02-25 21:11 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-02-25 22:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-02-26 1:48 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-02-26 6:02 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-02-26 20:20 ` Saravana Kannan [this message]
2014-02-26 3:38 ` [PATCH 1/3] cpufreq: stats: Remove redundant cpufreq_cpu_get() call Saravana Kannan
2014-02-26 5:06 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-02-26 20:04 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-02-26 3:38 ` [PATCH 2/3] cpufreq: stats: Fix error handling in __cpufreq_stats_create_table() Saravana Kannan
2014-02-26 5:11 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-02-26 3:38 ` [PATCH 3/3] cpufreq: Set policy to non-NULL only after all hotplug online work is done Saravana Kannan
2014-02-26 6:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-02-26 5:20 ` [PATCH] " 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=530E4C8A.6060906@codeaurora.org \
--to=skannan@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--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).