Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: Properly handle errors from cpufreq_init_policy()

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>]

On Thursday, July 16, 2015 10:16:14 AM Jon Medhurst wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 02:32 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 08, 2015 04:50:23 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 08-07-15, 12:17, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> > > > I tried these patches without the earlier "cpufreq: Initialize the
> > > > governor again while restoring policy" patch.
> > > > 
> > > > The result is that the error when bringing a cpu online is with flagged
> > > > up with a kernel message:
> > > > 
> > > >   cpufreq: cpufreq_add_dev: Failed to initialize policy for cpu: 1 (-16)
> > > > 
> > > > and afterwards, the sysfs entries that I was poking and causing the
> > > > crash aren't present. So looks like this patch has done what we want,
> > > > and cleaned things up after an error. So...
> > > > 
> > > > Tested-by: Jon Medhurst <tixy@linaro.org>
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks for the prompt fix.
> > > 
> > > And thanks for your help in getting these tested :)
> > 
> > Both queued up for 4.3, thanks!
> 
> The crash I was getting was a regression caused by changes that went
> into 4.2-rc1.
> 
> Indeed, the first patch from Viresh is marked:
> 
> Fixes: 18bf3a124ef8 ("cpufreq: Mark policy->governor = NULL for inactive policies")
> For 4.2-rc
> 
> And I am having to carry that first patch to keep two ARM big.LITTLE
> platforms working.

That one is going into 4.2-rc, I'm about to send a pull request with it.


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.