On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Javi Merino <javi.mer...@arm.com> wrote: > From: Kapileshwar Singh <kapileshwar.si...@arm.com> > > When cpufreq changes the policy cpu, we need to update our cached cpu > device accordingly. > > Cc: Zhang Rui <rui.zh...@intel.com> > Cc: Eduardo Valentin <edubez...@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Kapileshwar Singh <kapileshwar.si...@arm.com> > --- > drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > index c4974144c787..e306d6bc3cf1 100644 > --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > @@ -269,6 +269,9 @@ static int cpufreq_thermal_notifier(struct notifier_block > *nb, > mutex_unlock(&cooling_cpufreq_lock); > break; > > + case CPUFREQ_UPDATE_POLICY_CPU: > + update_cpu_device(policy->cpu); > + break; > case CPUFREQ_CREATE_POLICY: > update_cpu_device(policy->cpu); > break;
First of all, I wasn't able to find 3/5 on LKML and I looked at 3/7 from an earlier version to look at how update_cpu_device() looks like. What I couldn't understand is why do you need to update things if policy->cpu is changing ? I am expecting a detailed answer here according to your design, and we may be able to work out without such updates. Lets see.. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
