Currently we are simply returning from target() if we encounter some error after
broadcasting CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE notifier. Which looks to be wrong as others might
depend on POSTCHANGE notifier for their functioning.
So, better broadcast CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE notifier for these failure cases too,
but with old frequency.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c | 13 ++++++++-----
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c
index 1cab820..6561853 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c
@@ -74,7 +74,9 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
if (IS_ERR(opp)) {
rcu_read_unlock();
pr_err("failed to find OPP for %ld\n", freq_Hz);
- return PTR_ERR(opp);
+ freqs.new = freqs.old;
+ ret = PTR_ERR(opp);
+ goto post_notify;
}
volt = opp_get_voltage(opp);
rcu_read_unlock();
@@ -92,7 +94,7 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
if (ret) {
pr_err("failed to scale voltage up: %d\n", ret);
freqs.new = freqs.old;
- return ret;
+ goto post_notify;
}
}
@@ -101,7 +103,8 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
pr_err("failed to set clock rate: %d\n", ret);
if (cpu_reg)
regulator_set_voltage_tol(cpu_reg, volt_old, tol);
- return ret;
+ freqs.new = freqs.old;
+ goto post_notify;
}
/* scaling down? scale voltage after frequency */
@@ -111,13 +114,13 @@ static int cpu0_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
pr_err("failed to scale voltage down: %d\n", ret);
clk_set_rate(cpu_clk, freqs.old * 1000);
freqs.new = freqs.old;
- return ret;
}
}
+post_notify:
cpufreq_notify_transition(policy, &freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE);
- return 0;
+ return ret;
}
static int cpu0_cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
--
1.7.12.rc2.18.g61b472e
--
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
