From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org, toralf.foerster@gmx.de, robert.jarzmik@intel.com,
        durgadoss.r@intel.com, tianyu.lan@intel.com, lantianyu1986@gmail.com,
        dirk.brandewie@gmail.com, stern@rowland.harvard.edu,
        linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Cpufreq, cpu hotplug, suspend/resume related fixes
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 00:33:55 +0200
Message-ID: <6515593.XAmN11qlGF@vostro.rjw.lan>
User-Agent: KMail/4.9.5 (Linux/3.10.0+; KDE/4.9.5; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <20130711221419.547.69781.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com>
References: <20130711221419.547.69781.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2347
Lines: 63

On Friday, July 12, 2013 03:45:17 AM Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> 
> Hi,

Hi,

> Commit a66b2e (cpufreq: Preserve sysfs files across suspend/resume) caused
> some subtle regressions in the cpufreq subsystem during suspend/resume.
> This patchset is aimed at rectifying those problems, by fixing the regression
> as well as achieving the original goal of that commit in a proper way.
> 
> Patch 1 reverts the above commit, and is CC'ed to stable.
> 
> Patches 2 - 5 reorganize the code and have no functional impact, and can go
> in as general cleanups as well. This reorganization builds a base that the
> rest of the patches will make use of.
> 
> Patch 6 and 7 add a mechanism to perform light-weight init/tear-down of CPUs
> in the cpufreq subsystem and finally patch 8 uses it to preserve sysfs files
> across suspend/resume.
> 
> All the patches apply on current mainline.
> 
> 
> Robert, Durgadoss, it would be great if you could try it out and see if it works
> well for your usecase. I tested it locally and cpufreq related files did retain
> their permissions across suspend/resume. Let me know if it works fine in your
> setup too.
> 
> And I'd of course appreciate to hear from Dirk, Tianyu and Toralf to know
> whether their systems work fine after:
> a. applying only the first commit (this is what gets backported to stable)
> b. applying all the commits
> 
> (Note: I had to use Michael's fix[1] to avoid CPU hotplug deadlock while
> testing this patchset. Though that patch also touches cpufreq subsystem, it
> doesn't affect this patchset in any way and there is absolutely no dependency
> between the two in terms of code. That fix just makes basic CPU hotplug work
> without locking up on current mainline).
> 
> [1]. https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/10/611
> 
> 
> Thank you very much!

Thanks Srivatsa!

I'm going to take [1/8] for 3.11 and queue up the rest for 3.12 if people don't
hate them.  This way we'll have some more testing coverage before they reach
the mainline hopefully.

Thanks,
Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/