On 14 August 2013 14:20, Xiaoguang Chen wrote:
> Hi, Viresh
> After checking your patch, I find that __cpufreq_set_policy function
> doesn't check STOP and EXIT 's return value
> is it on purpose? if not, I can provide a patch to add it.
I thought we probably can't break on these calls here,
2013/8/14 Viresh Kumar :
> On 14 August 2013 13:49, Xiaoguang Chen wrote:
>> Yes, "START (If STOP passed)", this is important, we don't have this
>> patch on our code base, So even Process B's STOP failed(as governor
>> enable flag is set to false by process A already ), it can still do
>> START
On 14 August 2013 13:49, Xiaoguang Chen wrote:
> Yes, "START (If STOP passed)", this is important, we don't have this
> patch on our code base, So even Process B's STOP failed(as governor
> enable flag is set to false by process A already ), it can still do
> START operation, So my problem
2013/8/14 Viresh Kumar :
> I am still not sure if I got what you are trying to say, sorry :(
>
> On 14 August 2013 13:06, Xiaoguang Chen wrote:
>> Please see below code in __cpufreq_governor function
>>
>> mutex_lock(_governor_lock);
>> if ((!policy->governor_enabled && (event ==
I am still not sure if I got what you are trying to say, sorry :(
On 14 August 2013 13:06, Xiaoguang Chen wrote:
> Please see below code in __cpufreq_governor function
>
> mutex_lock(_governor_lock);
> if ((!policy->governor_enabled && (event == CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP)) ||
>
2013/8/14 Viresh Kumar :
> On 13 August 2013 12:39, Xiaoguang Chen wrote:
>> __cpufreq_governor operation needs to be executed one by one.
>> If one operation is ongoing, the other operation can't be executed.
>> If the order is not guaranteed, there may be unexpected behavior.
>
> What order??
I
2013/8/14 Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org:
On 13 August 2013 12:39, Xiaoguang Chen che...@marvell.com wrote:
__cpufreq_governor operation needs to be executed one by one.
If one operation is ongoing, the other operation can't be executed.
If the order is not guaranteed, there may be
I am still not sure if I got what you are trying to say, sorry :(
On 14 August 2013 13:06, Xiaoguang Chen chenxg.marv...@gmail.com wrote:
Please see below code in __cpufreq_governor function
mutex_lock(cpufreq_governor_lock);
if ((!policy-governor_enabled (event == CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP)) ||
2013/8/14 Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org:
I am still not sure if I got what you are trying to say, sorry :(
On 14 August 2013 13:06, Xiaoguang Chen chenxg.marv...@gmail.com wrote:
Please see below code in __cpufreq_governor function
mutex_lock(cpufreq_governor_lock);
if
On 14 August 2013 13:49, Xiaoguang Chen chenxg.marv...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, START (If STOP passed), this is important, we don't have this
patch on our code base, So even Process B's STOP failed(as governor
enable flag is set to false by process A already ), it can still do
START operation,
2013/8/14 Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org:
On 14 August 2013 13:49, Xiaoguang Chen chenxg.marv...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, START (If STOP passed), this is important, we don't have this
patch on our code base, So even Process B's STOP failed(as governor
enable flag is set to false by process
On 14 August 2013 14:20, Xiaoguang Chen chenxg.marv...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, Viresh
After checking your patch, I find that __cpufreq_set_policy function
doesn't check STOP and EXIT 's return value
is it on purpose? if not, I can provide a patch to add it.
I thought we probably can't break on
On 13 August 2013 12:39, Xiaoguang Chen wrote:
> __cpufreq_governor operation needs to be executed one by one.
> If one operation is ongoing, the other operation can't be executed.
> If the order is not guaranteed, there may be unexpected behavior.
What order??
> For example, governor is in
__cpufreq_governor operation needs to be executed one by one.
If one operation is ongoing, the other operation can't be executed.
If the order is not guaranteed, there may be unexpected behavior.
For example, governor is in enable state, and one process
tries to stop the goveror, but it is
__cpufreq_governor operation needs to be executed one by one.
If one operation is ongoing, the other operation can't be executed.
If the order is not guaranteed, there may be unexpected behavior.
For example, governor is in enable state, and one process
tries to stop the goveror, but it is
On 13 August 2013 12:39, Xiaoguang Chen che...@marvell.com wrote:
__cpufreq_governor operation needs to be executed one by one.
If one operation is ongoing, the other operation can't be executed.
If the order is not guaranteed, there may be unexpected behavior.
What order??
For example,
16 matches
Mail list logo
