[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53D07737.70904@codeaurora.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 20:02:15 -0700
From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
CC: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@...gle.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Don't destroy/realloc policy/sysfs on hotplug/suspend
On 07/16/2014 03:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 09, 2014 07:37:30 PM Saravana Kannan wrote:
>> Preliminary patch. Not tested. Just sending out to give an idea of what I'm
>> looking to do. Expect a lot more simplification when it's done.
>>
>> Benefits:
>> * A lot more simpler code.
>> * Less stability issues.
>> * Suspend/resume time would improve.
>> * Hotplug time would improve.
>> * Sysfs file permissions would be maintained.
>> * More policy settings would be maintained across suspend/resume.
>> * cpufreq stats would be maintained across hotplug for all CPUs.
>
> One problem. The real hotplug (when the CPU actually goes away) depends on
> offline removing all that stuff for it. How are you going to address that?
>
Ok, I think I've figured this out. But one question. Is it possible to
physically remove one CPU in a bunch of "related cpus" without also
unplugging the rest? Put another way, can you unplug one core from a
cluster?
It's not too hard to support that too, but if it's not a realistic case,
I would rather not write code for that.
-Saravana
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
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