Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: make sure frequency transitions are serialized

[Viresh Kumar]

On 26 September 2013 00:07, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> So the problem is real, but the fix seems to be of a "quick and dirty" kind.

Hmm..

> First of all, it looks like we need a clear "begin transition" call that
> I suppose drivers should execute from their .target() methods once they have
> decided to do a transition.  That would increment the "ongoing" counter etc.
>
> Second, we need a corresponding "end transition" call that would be executed
> whenever appropriate from the driver's perspective.

Hmm..

> Clearly, these two things should be independent of the notifiers and the
> notifications should only be done between "begin transition" and "end
> transition" and only by whoever called the "begin transition" to start with.

So, we need to have begin/end calls in cpufreq_out_of_sync() as well?
As that is sending notifications..

> Now, question is what should happen if "begin transition" is called when
> the previous transition hasn't been completed yet, should it block or should
> it fail?  There seem to be arguments for both, but I suppose blocking would be
> easier to implement.

Hmm.. I will repost this once my other patches are in now.. as that will
change ->target() routine for multiple drivers and things would be simple
to fix then..
--
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/