[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130913161820.GM19363@lunn.ch>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 18:18:20 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: rjw@...k.pl, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, patches@...aro.org,
cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 195/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: remove calls to
cpufreq_notify_transition()
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:32:21PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> - if (freqs.old != freqs.new) {
> - local_irq_disable();
> -
> - /* Disable interrupts to the CPU */
> - reg = readl_relaxed(priv.base);
> - reg |= CPU_SW_INT_BLK;
> - writel_relaxed(reg, priv.base);
> -
> - switch (state) {
> - case STATE_CPU_FREQ:
> - clk_disable(priv.powersave_clk);
> - break;
> - case STATE_DDR_FREQ:
> - clk_enable(priv.powersave_clk);
> - break;
> - }
Hi Viresh
I see you removed the test that the old and the new frequency are
different. Is this guaranteed by the core? Because if not, you can
lockup the CPU. The call to cpu_do_idle() will never return.
Thanks
Andrew
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists