From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> In cpufreq_update_policy(), instead of updating new_policy.cur separately, which is kind of confusing, because cpufreq_set_policy() doesn't take that value into account directly anyway, make the copy of the existing policy after calling cpufreq_update_current_freq().
No intentional changes of behavior. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 19 +++++++------------ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) Index: linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c =================================================================== --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ linux-pm/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -2354,23 +2354,18 @@ void cpufreq_update_policy(unsigned int if (policy_is_inactive(policy)) goto unlock; - pr_debug("updating policy for CPU %u\n", cpu); - memcpy(&new_policy, policy, sizeof(*policy)); - new_policy.min = policy->user_policy.min; - new_policy.max = policy->user_policy.max; - /* * BIOS might change freq behind our back * -> ask driver for current freq and notify governors about a change */ - if (cpufreq_driver->get && !cpufreq_driver->setpolicy) { - if (cpufreq_suspended) - goto unlock; + if (cpufreq_driver->get && !cpufreq_driver->setpolicy && + (cpufreq_suspended || WARN_ON(!cpufreq_update_current_freq(policy)))) + goto unlock; - new_policy.cur = cpufreq_update_current_freq(policy); - if (WARN_ON(!new_policy.cur)) - goto unlock; - } + pr_debug("updating policy for CPU %u\n", cpu); + memcpy(&new_policy, policy, sizeof(*policy)); + new_policy.min = policy->user_policy.min; + new_policy.max = policy->user_policy.max; cpufreq_set_policy(policy, &new_policy);