From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: Avoid attempts to create duplicate symbolic links
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 03:38:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2112385.YuDJ7h1x56@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150727143935.GB18535@linux>
On Monday, July 27, 2015 08:09:35 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 27-07-15, 15:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Say the subsys add callback runs for a CPU and it doesn't have a policy.
> > If it is offline, we ignore it and the add callback won't be executed
> > for it again.
> >
> > In turn, if it is online, we create a policy for it and we should (right
> > away) link the policy to all of the CPUs that were offline when the subsys add
> > callback was called for them. That's what we do today.
> >
> > Is there anything missing in that?
>
> So the code is working properly after your patch, but I was talking
> on the lines of what Russell suggested.
>
> We should play with the links only when we receive add-dev/remove-dev
> from subsys callbacks. The exception to that will be the offline CPUs
> for which add-dev is called before their policy existed.
The rule is supposed to be "all of the present CPUs which do not own
a policy should point to one, unless it doesn't exist". The right
approach is then to create links from them to a policy object as soon
as we create one for them. Waiting for something else to happen is just
pointless and this approach covers both the offline and online CPUs, so
I don't think that changing it would improve things really.
Thanks,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-29 1:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-23 21:14 [PATCH] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-24 14:09 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-24 20:20 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-24 22:17 ` [PATCH v2] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-25 13:00 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-25 22:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-26 0:28 ` [PATCH v3] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 2:29 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 12:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 2:27 ` [PATCH v2] " Viresh Kumar
2015-07-27 13:45 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-27 14:39 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-29 1:38 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2015-07-29 5:45 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-29 9:11 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-07-29 13:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-29 14:21 ` Viresh Kumar
2015-07-29 20:32 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-07-30 9:00 ` 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=2112385.YuDJ7h1x56@vostro.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=rafael@kernel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®