On 27 November 2013 01:48, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 08:39:02 PM Pavel Machek wrote: >> So... we freeze frequencies in whatever state they are, yes? Better go through the V3 of this patchset: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/11/25/838 We are giving drivers and opportunity to set core to whatever frequency they want before suspending. > Yes. The idea was to do that after suspending devices in which case it wouldn't > matter so much. But Viresh always has to complicate things. :) Its complicated by the kind of designs we have for our hardware. We tried the noirq callbacks and it worked atleast for Nishanth, who reported the problem initially. But the problem started when drivers wanted to change their frequencies before suspending and that can't happen in noirq place.. I had another idea but then left it thinking that it might be even more complicated :) What about both dpm_suspend_noirq and dpm_suspend callbacks. Drivers will change freq in dpm_suspend_noirq and dpm_suspend will stop governors? But the question is can governors try another frequency at that time? i.e. override whatever is configured by drivers? >> Should we go to some specific frequency? > > If that is done where it is done, yes, we should. You meant dpm_suspend() here, right? -- 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
