Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: suspend/resume governors with PM notifiers

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday, November 18, 2013 09:37:39 PM Lan Tianyu wrote:
> On 11/18/2013 07:01 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 18 November 2013 16:27, Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> How about introducing a resume/suspend callback pointer or list(if there
> >> are several places that need to deal with cpu resume/suspend) in the
> >> struct cpu and populate it in the cpufreq_add_dev()?
> >>
> >> The suspend/resume() of cpu_subsys needs to check the callback pointer
> >> and run it if available.
> >
> > That's almost a new infrastructure then and looks more hackish :)
> 
> The resume/suspend() must be stored in the struct driver->pm? :)
> 
> > 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.
> 
> 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 don't see why not.

Thanks!

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/