On 08-04-16, 23:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for
> cpufreq_suspended set
>
> Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended
> is set, do nothing at all in cpufreq_start_governor() in that case.
>
> That function is called in the cpufreq_online() path, and may also
> be called from cpufreq_offline() in some cases, which are invoked
> by the nonboot CPUs disabing/enabling code during system suspend
> to RAM and resume. That happens when all devices have been
> suspended, so if the cpufreq driver relies on things like I2C to
> get the current frequency, it may not be ready to do that then.
>
> The change here prevents problems from happening for this reason.
>
> Fixes: 3bbf8fe3ae08 (cpufreq: Always update current frequency before startig
> governor)
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -2053,6 +2053,9 @@ static int cpufreq_start_governor(struct
> {
> int ret;
>
> + if (cpufreq_suspended)
> + return 0;
> +
> if (cpufreq_driver->get && !cpufreq_driver->setpolicy)
> cpufreq_update_current_freq(policy);
Since we no longer have the same check in cpufreq_exit_governor(),
what about moving it to cpufreq_update_current_freq() instead? That's
all we are trying to protect here anyway, as cpufreq_governor() is
already protected.
--
viresh
