[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190709072616.bt2754numhdnjb3t@vireshk-i7>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 12:56:16 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: cpufreq notifiers break suspend -- Re: suspend broken in
next-20190704 on Thinkpad X60
On 08-07-19, 16:13, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2019-07-08 14:58:40, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > Though it makes me wonder why I didn't hit this thing. I was using the
> > cpu_cooling device the other day, which calls cpufreq_update_policy()
> > very frequently on heat-up. And I had a hair dryer blowing over my
> > board to heat it up. Lemme check that again :)
>
> Can you test on some x86 ACPI? No dryers needed :-).
>
Found out why I didn't hit it then. I tested it after converting
cpu_cooling driver to use QoS APIs and there is no double locking with
that.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists