From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753509Ab3KNO1Z (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:27:25 -0500 Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:38862 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754603Ab3KNO1K (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:27:10 -0500 Message-ID: <5284DDB9.7040502@ti.com> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:27:05 -0600 From: Nishanth Menon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: viresh kumar CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "cpufreq@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Shawn Guo Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] cpufreq: cpufreq-cpu0: do not allow transitions with regulators suspended References: <1382638087-32054-1-git-send-email-nm@ti.com> <52824522.7020401@ti.com> <20131113151645.GA17828@kahuna> <52842671.40703@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <52842671.40703@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/13/2013 07:25 PM, viresh kumar wrote: > On Wednesday 13 November 2013 08:46 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: >> arrgh, my bad.. Apologies for the bad one.. I missed it :( Does the following >> look equivalent? > > yes. > >> With this, I now see: > >> [ 43.212714] cpufreq: cpufreq_add_policy_cpu: Failed to stop governor >> ^^^ ?? > > Ahh, I missed this part. I thought it will fail at some other place where there > is no error checking :), but that's not true. > > Following should fix it for you and looks to be the right way as well. > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > index dc67fa0..30b09d3 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > @@ -1530,6 +1530,14 @@ static void cpufreq_bp_resume(void) > } > } > > + if (has_target()) { > + if ((ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_START)) || > + (ret = __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS))) { > + pr_err("%s: Failed to start governor\n", __func__); > + goto fail; > + } > + } > + > schedule_work(&policy->update); > > fail: > I am guessing this is a little too early for restarting policy here considering syscore_ops->resume is pretty early.. http://pastebin.mozilla.org/3602746 is the equivalent patch for v3.12 http://pastebin.mozilla.org/3602747 is the result. -- Regards, Nishanth Menon