Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Mar 2014 00:22:15 +0530 | From | "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] intel_pstate: Set core to min P state during core offline |
| |
On 03/18/2014 08:31 PM, Dirk Brandewie wrote: > On 03/17/2014 10:44 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 2:33 AM, <dirk.brandewie@gmail.com> wrote: >>> + >>> static int intel_pstate_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) >>> { >>> struct cpudata *cpu; >>> @@ -818,7 +824,7 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver intel_pstate_driver = { >>> .setpolicy = intel_pstate_set_policy, >>> .get = intel_pstate_get, >>> .init = intel_pstate_cpu_init, >>> - .exit = intel_pstate_cpu_exit, >>> + .stop = intel_pstate_cpu_stop, >> >> Probably, keep exit as is and only change P-state in stop(). So that >> allocation of resources happen in init() and they are freed in exit()? >> > I looked at doing just that but it junked up the code. if stop() is called > during PREPARE then init() will be called via __cpufreq_add_dev() in the > ONLINE > and DOWN_FAILED case. So once stop() is called the driver will be ready for > init() to be called exactly like when exit() is called. >
I'm sorry, but that didn't make much sense to me. Can you be a little more specific as to what problems you hit while trying to have a ->stop() which sets min P state and a separate ->exit() which frees the resources? I think we can achieve this with almost no trouble.
If you ignore the failure case (such as DOWN_FAILED) for now, do you still see any serious roadblocks?
Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat
| |