https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55411 --- Comment #31 from Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@xxxxxxx> 2013-03-24 09:48:41 --- (In reply to comment #28) > My weekend is already spoiled (due to my bugs :) ) and i don't want to spoil > yours. Don't worry about it. They're all days in the week, to me. I don't really have a defined "weekend". In fact, I had been (somewhat impatiently) grumbling to myself Friday that I was likely to have to wait until Monday for something concrete to test, so I'm happy to be demonstrated wrong! =:^) > [PATCH] cpufreq: acpi-cpufreq: Set policy->cpus correctly from .init() You appear to be on the right path as all the dirs and symlinks are there now, but it looks like you'll need a v2 as the order/pairing is now very strange, both as booted and after a s2ram/resume (which changes the order but it's still strange): Testing against 3.9-rc4 now. Patch applied pre-suspend ls -dl as above (original pairing is 0/1, 2/3, 4/5, with the first always a dir and the second always a symlink to the first, as seen in comment #0): /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/cpufreq -> ../cpu0/cpufreq/ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/cpufreq/ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cpufreq/ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq -> ../cpu3/cpufreq/ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/cpufreq -> ../cpu2/cpufreq/ Post s2ram/resume cycle: /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/cpufreq -> ../cpu0/cpufreq/ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/cpufreq -> ../cpu4/cpufreq/ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cpufreq -> ../cpu5/cpufreq/ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq/ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/cpufreq/ But I don't know whether it's CPU ordering that's weird, or the cpufreq ordering. IOW, I don't know whether it /should/ be 0/1, 2/3, 4/5 or not, because I don't know whether those numbers actually reflect the hardware so it's the ordering above that's bad, or if the cpu numbers are just arbitrarily assigned, and the ordering above reflects the actual hardware, and just looks strange due to the arbitrary cpu numbering. Either way, there's the correct number of dirs and links now, but the ordering is extremely confusing and looks wrong, regardless of whether it actually corresponds to the hardware or not, something I don't have the ability to judge. Thanks! =:^) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
