On 19 August 2013 16:57, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > It wasn't my patch actually.. It only made it visible that's it :) > The problem is: > - On suspend all CPUs are removed and so governors are > stopped. > - On resume, handle_update() is called for the boot cpu and > cpu_add_dev for all others. > > handle_update() doesn't start governor but only plays with > CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS.. when we start adding other > CPUs and call: cpufreq_add_policy_cpu() which fails in > following call: > > __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP); > > and so cpufreq_policy_cpu never gets initialized to > policy->cpu and stays at -1, and hence the crash. > > So, there are few problems with core at this point: > - I don't understand how does the work done in > cpufreq_add_dev() gets done for boot cpu during > resume ? And so how does Srivatsa's "frozen" solution > really works (I haven't had time to investigate, its not > that I couldn't understand it :) ).. > > - We need to start governor boot cpu in handle_update() > and things would be solved... Whatever I wrote here was simply _Bullshit_ :( I am about to send you a fixup patchset that fixes this issue, and yes it was my patch which introduced this problem :(, but because of some mishandling of cpufreq_policy_list :) -- viresh -- 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
