On 21-03-16, 15:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> > > Starting a governor in cpufreq always follows the same pattern > involving two calls to cpufreq_governor(), one with the event > argument set to CPUFREQ_GOV_START and one with that argument set to > CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS. > > Introduce cpufreq_start_governor() that will carry out those two > operations and make all places where governors are started use it. > > That slightly modifies the behavior of cpufreq_set_policy() which > now also will go back to the old governor if the second call to > cpufreq_governor() (the one with event equal to CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS) > fails, but that really is how it should work in the first place. > > Also cpufreq_resume() will now pring an error message if the > CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS call to cpufreq_governor() fails, but that > makes it follow cpufreq_add_policy_cpu() and cpufreq_offline() > in that respect. > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org> -- viresh
