On 12 September 2013 22:56, Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 09/12/2013 09:25 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: > Anyway, nevermind, as of now, subsystems do work around this suitably, so > there is no known bug as such at the present. Just that we could have probably > done it a better way, that's all. Yeah, there is no bug as of now due to the number of hacks adopted by different framework.. I believe we can still have a cleanup series to take care of this stuff.. That would be some improvement and would be better for future.. Otherwise this kind of problems would keep coming again and again.. > You're absolutely right! Regular CPU hotplug is more demanding than > suspend/resume in the context we are discussing, since any CPU can be > hotplugged at any time and put back in any order. So code like cpufreq should > be prepared to work with any ordering. And that part is well implemented and tested as far as I know.. -- 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
