On 18 November 2013 19:07, Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The resume/suspend() must be stored in the struct driver->pm? :) We certainly can't move back to increase redundancy by implementing driver's specific stuff here :) >> Apart from that even cpufreq would be a bit hacky as we don't really need >> per-cpu callbacks.. >> > > This maybe depends on where we want the issue to be fixed, right? > The cpufreq driver also can fix the issue if we run their cpu_driver > resume/suspend callback earlier. same as above.. > Another point, I just see cpuidle_resume() and cpuidle_pause() are called in > the dpm_resume_noirq and dpm_suspend_noirq(). Not sure whether this can be > applied to cpufreq. I will still prefer syscore_ops instead of calling framework specific routines directly from dpm_**() routines.. Don't know why this was done this way for cpuidle.. -- 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
