On 26 February 2014 07:18, Saravana Kannan <skannan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 02/25/2014 02:41 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> And is "fully initialized" actually well defined?
>
> The point in add dev/hot plug path after which we will no longer change
> policy fields without sending further CPUFREQ_UPDATE_POLICY_CPU /
> CPUFRE_NOTIFY notifiers.
Okay..
> Pretty much the end of __cpufreq_add_dev() so that it's after:
> - cpufreq_init_policy()
> - And the update of userpolicy fields that after thie init call
No. In that case it can be considered initialized before cpufreq_init_policy().
As we do send CPUFREQ_NOTIFY after that from cpufreq_init_policy()->
cpufreq_set_policy().
There are two types of fields within policy, some are very basic: cpu/min/max/
affected_cpus/related_cpus
some are advanced: sysfs/governors/..
And as a rule you have to get policy->rwsem lock before accessing policy
members. We might not have followed it very well for small things like cpu.
And so if you are doing anything over that, please use a lock and that is
already present in cpufreq_update_policy().
With my latest patchset that I sent yesterday, locking is improved and now
a policy will be usable only after the rwsem is released. And that should be
fine. And so making it available in the per-cpu variable after all the necessary
fields are filled looks fine to me. And so I don't think we need to move it
after call to cpufreq_init_policy(maybe a better name to this function is
required)..
> Ok, here's some pseudo code to explain it better:
>
> Something like, replace all calls to cpufreq_driver->get with
> __cpufreq_driver_get() with the fn being something like:
>
> unsigned int __cpufreq_driver_get(cpufreq_policy *policy)
> {
> if (policy->clk)
> return clk_get_rate(policy->clk) / 1000;
> else
> return cpufreq_driver->get(policy->cpu);
This part may still use cpufreq_cpu_get().
> }
Drivers are free to have their implementation of ->get() even
if they have a valid policy->clk field..
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
