Re: [PATCH 195/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:32:21PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:

> -	if (freqs.old != freqs.new) {
> -		local_irq_disable();
> -
> -		/* Disable interrupts to the CPU */
> -		reg = readl_relaxed(priv.base);
> -		reg |= CPU_SW_INT_BLK;
> -		writel_relaxed(reg, priv.base);
> -
> -		switch (state) {
> -		case STATE_CPU_FREQ:
> -			clk_disable(priv.powersave_clk);
> -			break;
> -		case STATE_DDR_FREQ:
> -			clk_enable(priv.powersave_clk);
> -			break;
> -		}

Hi Viresh

I see you removed the test that the old and the new frequency are
different. Is this guaranteed by the core? Because if not, you can
lockup the CPU. The call to cpu_do_idle() will never return.

	Thanks
		Andrew
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Devel]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Forum]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux