From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754173Ab3IMQV1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Sep 2013 12:21:27 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([178.209.37.122]:53178 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752715Ab3IMQV0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Sep 2013 12:21:26 -0400 Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 18:18:20 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn To: Viresh Kumar Cc: rjw@sisk.pl, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Andrew Lunn Subject: Re: [PATCH 195/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition() Message-ID: <20130913161820.GM19363@lunn.ch> References: <0a512914fd48b2d6db685446f88b9a096eff79a1.1379063063.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0a512914fd48b2d6db685446f88b9a096eff79a1.1379063063.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:32:21PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > - if (freqs.old != freqs.new) { > - local_irq_disable(); > - > - /* Disable interrupts to the CPU */ > - reg = readl_relaxed(priv.base); > - reg |= CPU_SW_INT_BLK; > - writel_relaxed(reg, priv.base); > - > - switch (state) { > - case STATE_CPU_FREQ: > - clk_disable(priv.powersave_clk); > - break; > - case STATE_DDR_FREQ: > - clk_enable(priv.powersave_clk); > - break; > - } Hi Viresh I see you removed the test that the old and the new frequency are different. Is this guaranteed by the core? Because if not, you can lockup the CPU. The call to cpu_do_idle() will never return. Thanks Andrew