Re: [PATCH 4/4] cpufreq: Change order of online() CB and policy->cpus modification

[Viresh Kumar]

On 15-06-22, 16:43, Pierre Gondois wrote:
> >From a state where all policy->related_cpus are offline, putting one
> of the policy's CPU back online re-activates the policy by:
>  1. Calling cpufreq_driver->online()
>  2. Setting the CPU in policy->cpus
> 
> qcom_cpufreq_hw_cpu_online() makes use of policy->cpus. Thus 1. and 2.
> should be inverted to avoid having a policy->cpus empty. The
> qcom-cpufreq-hw is the only driver affected by this.
> 
> Fixes: a1eb080a0447 ("cpufreq: qcom-hw: provide online/offline operations")
> Signed-off-by: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 2cad42774164..36043be16d8e 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1350,15 +1350,15 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
>  	}
>  
>  	if (!new_policy && cpufreq_driver->online) {
> +		/* Recover policy->cpus using related_cpus */
> +		cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, policy->related_cpus);
> +
>  		ret = cpufreq_driver->online(policy);
>  		if (ret) {
>  			pr_debug("%s: %d: initialization failed\n", __func__,
>  				 __LINE__);
>  			goto out_exit_policy;
>  		}
> -
> -		/* Recover policy->cpus using related_cpus */
> -		cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, policy->related_cpus);
>  	} else {
>  		cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, cpumask_of(cpu));

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>

-- 
viresh