Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758798Ab2J2Lmj (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2012 07:42:39 -0400 Received: from mail-oa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.219.46]:51150 "EHLO mail-oa0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758624Ab2J2Lmi (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2012 07:42:38 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1351079900-32236-3-git-send-email-hongbo.zhang@linaro.com> References: <1350387889-15324-1-git-send-email-hongbo.zhang@linaro.com> <1351079900-32236-1-git-send-email-hongbo.zhang@linaro.com> <1351079900-32236-3-git-send-email-hongbo.zhang@linaro.com> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 17:12:35 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/6] Thermal: make sure cpufreq cooling register after cpufreq driver From: Amit Kachhap To: "hongbo.zhang" Cc: linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, STEricsson_nomadik_linux@list.st.com, kernel@igloocommunity.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, "hongbo.zhang" , patches@linaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1848 Lines: 50 On 24 October 2012 17:28, hongbo.zhang wrote: > From: "hongbo.zhang" > > The cpufreq works as a cooling device, so the cooling layer should check if the > cpufreq driver is initialized or not. > > Signed-off-by: hongbo.zhang > --- > drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > index b6b4c2a..7519a0b 100644 > --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c > @@ -354,6 +354,10 @@ struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register( > int ret = 0, i; > struct cpufreq_policy policy; > > + /* make sure cpufreq driver has been initialized */ > + if (!cpufreq_frequency_get_table(cpumask_any(clip_cpus))) > + return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER); > + Hi Hongbo, I am not against this change but this might cause unnecessary delay in probe thread. I also thought about it but have not put this restriction. Actually you can put a check in platform_bind for this condition and defer the binding till the time actual throttling starts. So basically only after throttling cpufreq_table is needed. (See my implementation exynos_thermal.c). Thanks, Amit Daniel > list_for_each_entry(cpufreq_dev, &cooling_cpufreq_list, node) > cpufreq_dev_count++; > > -- > 1.7.11.3 > > > _______________________________________________ > linaro-dev mailing list > linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev -- 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/