[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 17:36:19 +0800
From: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@...il.com>
To: rjw@...ysocki.net, viresh.kumar@...aro.org
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
xuewyan@...mail.com, Xuewen.Yan@...soc.com
Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: Judging new_policy before update related_cpus
From: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan@...soc.com>
When the policy->related_cpus are all offline, and then
bring up one cpu, this time, if the ->online is NULL,
the code would update the ->related_cpus with ->cpus,
and now ->cpus is only one online cpu, as a result, the
->related_cpus is different from the origion ->related_cpus.
Signed-off-by: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan@...soc.com>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index d0a3525ce27f..3d512ac463a5 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1374,8 +1374,10 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
if (ret)
goto out_exit_policy;
- /* related_cpus should at least include policy->cpus. */
- cpumask_copy(policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus);
+ if (new_policy) {
+ /* related_cpus should at least include policy->cpus. */
+ cpumask_copy(policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus);
+ }
}
down_write(&policy->rwsem);
--
2.29.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists