[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181213103608.vs255cq46fu4w2cc@vireshk-i7>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 16:06:08 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Taniya Das <tdas@...eaurora.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, robh@...nel.org,
skannan@...eaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
evgreen@...gle.com, Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 2/2] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq
HW driver
On 13-12-18, 02:32, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> I have one policy for four CPUs. So take down all four of those CPUs by
> writing a 0 to the online file for each CPU, and then bring them back
> online. That should make cpufreq_driver->init() be called twice, once
> during boot when the CPUs are bound to the cpufreq devices, and second
> from the sysfs write when the user brings the first CPU in that policy
> online again by writing a 1 to the online file. If that second time it
> fails I suspect we hit the lockdep warning.
Okay, that is a special sequence. I will try to reproduce that
locally. Thanks.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists