The dash after "inactive" in the subject is not necessary IMO.
On Friday, May 08, 2015 11:53:50 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
Later commits would change the way policies are managed today. Policies wouldn't be freed on cpu hotplug (currently they aren't freed only for suspend), and while the CPU is offline, the sysfs cpufreq files would still be present.
User may accidentally try to update the sysfs files in following directory: '/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/cpufreq/'. And that would result in undefined behavior as policy wouldn't be active then.
Apart from updating the store() routine, we also update __cpufreq_get() which can call cpufreq_out_of_sync(). The later routine tries to update policy->cur and starts notifying kernel about it.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c index bd8a47b5054e..652a843a553b 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -887,11 +887,22 @@ static ssize_t store(struct kobject *kobj, struct attribute *attr, down_write(&policy->rwsem);
- /*
* Policy might not be active currently, and so we shouldn't try* updating any values here. policy->cpus is cleared for inactive policy* and so cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() should fail.
These comments don't really clarify things. It'd be better to say something like "Updating inactive policies is invalid, so avoid doing that."
*/- if (unlikely(policy_is_inactive(policy))) {
ret = -EPERM;
This doesn't seem to be the appropriate error code to return here.
-EBUSY or -EAGAIN would be better IMO.
goto unlock_policy_rwsem;- }
- if (fattr->store) ret = fattr->store(policy, buf, count); else ret = -EIO;
+unlock_policy_rwsem: up_write(&policy->rwsem); up_read(&cpufreq_rwsem); @@ -1619,6 +1630,14 @@ static unsigned int __cpufreq_get(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) ret_freq = cpufreq_driver->get(policy->cpu);
- /*
* Policy might not be active currently, and so we shouldn't try* updating any values here. policy->cpus is cleared for inactive policy* and so cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() should fail.*/- if (unlikely(policy_is_inactive(policy)))
return ret_freq;- if (ret_freq && policy->cur && !(cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS)) { /* verify no discrepancy between actual and