Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH V6 0/7] cpufreq: suspend early/resume late: dpm_{suspend|resume}() | Date | Tue, 18 Feb 2014 23:36:16 +0100 |
| |
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 01:30:52 PM Stephen Warren wrote: > On 02/17/2014 02:25 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > This patchset creates/calls cpufreq suspend/resume callbacks from dpm_{suspend|resume}() > > for handling suspend/resume of cpufreq governors and core. > > > > There are multiple problems that are fixed by this patch: > > - Nishanth Menon (TI) found an interesting problem on his platform, OMAP. His board > > wasn't working well with suspend/resume as calls for removing non-boot CPUs > > was turning out into a call to drivers ->target() which then tries to play > > with regulators. But regulators and their I2C bus were already suspended and > > this resulted in a failure. Many platforms have such problems, samsung, tegra, > > etc.. They solved it with driver specific PM notifiers where they used to > > disable their driver's ->target() routine. > > - Lan Tianyu (Intel) & Jinhyuk Choi (Broadcom) found an issue where tunables > > configuration for clusters/sockets with non-boot CPUs was getting lost after > > suspend/resume, as we were notifying governors with CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT on > > removal of the last cpu for that policy and so deallocating memory for > > tunables. This is fixed by this patch as we don't allow any operation on > > governors after device suspend and before device resume now. > > The series, > Tested-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
Is this series necessary to fix bugs that you're seeing in 3.14-rc and if so, the what bugs are they?
> Patch 7/7, > Acked-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com> >
-- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
| |