On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 01:23:37PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 1:09 PM Sudeep Holla <[email protected]> wrote: > >
[...] > > Yes, in that case additional logic in the driver also needed. I am fine > > if we enforce driver to deal with this issue, but was thinking if we can > > make it generic. Also I was just trying to avoid adding _suspend/resume > > to driver just to avoid this issue. > > I was wondering if cpufreq_offline()/online() could be invoked from > cpufreq_suspend()/resume() for the nonboot CPUs - if the driver needs > it (there could be a driver flag to indicate that). > > If they are made exit immediately when cpufreq_suspended is set (and > the requisite driver flag is set too), that might work AFAICS. Yes that sounds feasible. It should be fine to assume it's safe to call cpufreq_online on a CPU even for CPU that might have failed to come online or didn't reached a state in CPUHP from where CPUFreq callback is executed or am I missing something ? -- Regards, Sudeep
