On Monday 23 December 2013 12:25 PM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> That's correct. The immediate result of the failure is exactly the
> same.
Okay..
> The difference is that a subsequent resume would restore the cpufreq
> device whether it existed or not. That made a complete suspend/resume
> fix up any missing cpufreq device, e.g. one that was removed by a
> previous error.
I see.. Please see if below patch fixes it for you, it should :)
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 13:19:47 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: try to resume policies which failed on last resume
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
__cpufreq_add_dev() can fail sometimes while we are resuming our system.
Currently we are clearing all sysfs nodes for cpufreq's failed policy as that
could make userspace unstable. But if we suspend/resume again, we should atleast
try to bring back those policies.
This patch fixes this issue by clearing fallback data on failure and trying to
allocate a new struct cpufreq_policy on second resume.
Reported-by: Bjørn Mork <bj...@mork.no>
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index fab042e..7523d35 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1010,16 +1010,24 @@ static int __cpufreq_add_dev(struct device *dev, struct
subsys_interface *sif,
read_unlock_irqrestore(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags);
#endif
- if (frozen)
+ if (frozen) {
/* Restore the saved policy when doing light-weight init */
policy = cpufreq_policy_restore(cpu);
- else
+
+ /*
+ * As we failed to resume cpufreq core last time, lets try to
+ * create a new policy.
+ */
+ if (!policy)
+ frozen = false;
+ }
+
+ if (!frozen)
policy = cpufreq_policy_alloc();
if (!policy)
goto nomem_out;
-
/*
* In the resume path, since we restore a saved policy, the assignment
* to policy->cpu is like an update of the existing policy, rather than
@@ -1112,8 +1120,14 @@ err_get_freq:
if (cpufreq_driver->exit)
cpufreq_driver->exit(policy);
err_set_policy_cpu:
- if (frozen)
+ if (frozen) {
+ /*
+ * Clear fallback data as we should try to make things work on
+ * next suspend/resume
+ */
+ per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data_fallback, cpu) = NULL;
cpufreq_policy_put_kobj(policy);
+ }
cpufreq_policy_free(policy);
nomem_out:
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
