[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4759452.7dXrrSTGCc@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:22:01 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@...il.com>,
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>, Carlos Hernandez <ceh@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] cpufreq: Make sure CPU is running on a freq from freq-table
On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 08:31:02 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 27 November 2013 01:51, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
> > I was talking about the case when your
> >
> > __cpufreq_driver_target(policy, policy->cur - 1, CPUFREQ_RELATION_L);
> >
> > fails. The other case is not really interesting.
>
> Okay.. I actually thought the context of this chat is about "not fixing the
> frequency silently". That's what Dirk pointed out, if I am not wrong.
In that case you can simply print a message bashing the boot loader. :-)
> And hence I also support the new pr_warn I have added in those cases.
Sure.
> But yes a WARN_ON() can be printed out in case
> __cpufreq_driver_target() fails.
And here my question was: Is it safe to continue at all in that case?
Rafael
--
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