Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 17 Oct 2012 20:06:11 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/5] Thermal: make sure cpufreq cooling register after cpufreq driver | From | Viresh Kumar <> |
| |
On 16 October 2012 17:14, hongbo.zhang <hongbo.zhang@linaro.org> wrote: > From: "hongbo.zhang" <hongbo.zhang@linaro.com> > > The cpufreq works as a cooling device, so the cooling layer should > check and wait until the cpufreq driver is initialized.
Idea is good.
> Signed-off-by: hongbo.zhang <hongbo.zhang@linaro.com> > --- > drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 12 +++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > index d196230..01aba58 100644 > --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ > #include <linux/slab.h> > #include <linux/cpu.h> > #include <linux/cpu_cooling.h> > +#include <linux/delay.h>
Would be better if we add them alphabetically. That makes there maintenance easier. I know the list is already mismanaged. :)
If you can add another patch here to fix that, would be good.
> /** > * struct cpufreq_cooling_device > @@ -352,9 +353,18 @@ struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( > struct cpufreq_cooling_device *cpufreq_dev = NULL; > unsigned int cpufreq_dev_count = 0, min = 0, max = 0; > char dev_name[THERMAL_NAME_LENGTH]; > - int ret = 0, i; > + int ret = 0, to = 1000, i; > struct cpufreq_policy policy; > > + /* make sure cpufreq driver is initialized */ > + while (!cpufreq_frequency_get_table(0) && --to) > + mdelay(10); > + > + if (!to) { > + pr_err("No cpufreq driver act as cooling device.\n"); > + return ERR_PTR(-ENOSYS); > + }
I understand that you want cpufreq to be there before this thing, but i didn't like the idea here. There should be something else like returning -EPROBE_DEFER, so that driver can be pinged again.
-- viresh
| |