[PATCH v2] cpufreq: Don't destroy/realloc policy/sysfs on hotplug/suspend
viresh.kumar at linaro.org
Mon Jul 14 22:52:40 PDT 2014
On 15 July 2014 11:06, Saravana Kannan <skannan at codeaurora.org> wrote:
> Btw, I tried to take a stab at removing any assumption in cpufreq code about
> policy->cpu being ONLINE. There are 160 instances of those of with 23 are in
> So, even if we are sure cpufreq.c is fine, it's 137 other uses spread across
> all the other files. I definitely don't want to try and fix those as part of
> this patch. Way too risky and hard to get the test coverage it would need.
> Even some of the acpi cpufreq drivers seem to be making this assumption.
Hmm, yeah that would be an issue. So this is what you should do now:
- Left policy->cpu as it is, i.e. updated only when policy->cpu goes down.
- Just make sure sysfs nodes are untouched when any cpu goes down
> Btw, I think v3 is done. I did some testing and it was fine. But made some
> minor changes. Will test tomorrow to make sure I didn't break anything with
> the minor changes and then send them out.
Ok, just comply to the above comments.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel