[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKohpomm_2iWVOt8MyWFr6=zrEfuBo1z-fPvkaFk-H873-74cw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 08:43:10 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
Patch Tracking <patches@...aro.org>,
"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Kgene Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, jinchoi@...adcom.com,
Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@...el.com>,
Sebastian Capella <sebastian.capella@...aro.org>,
Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/6] cpufreq: suspend governors on system suspend/hibernate
On 27 November 2013 01:53, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 07:56:19 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 26 November 2013 04:59, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
>> > This appears to be racy. Is it really racy, or just seemingly?
>>
>> Why does it look racy to you? Userspace should be frozen by now,
>> policy_list should be stable as well as nobody would touch it.
>
> You're stopping governors while they may be in use in principle. Do we have
> suitable synchronization in place for that?
At what point exactly in suspend cycle do we suspend timers and workqueues.
I thought userspace would be frozen by now and so would be the governors..
--
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