On 01-07-15, 12:13, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
> Sorry for the mistake I made when cherry-picking the patch. Fix and resend
> again.
You really want above to show up in git logs ?
Any comments like this should be present:
- in cover-letter
- OR after the three dashes below ---
- OR must be followed with a scissors line, like this:
--------------8<--------
> __cpufreq_cooling_register() might fail if some CPU other than first one in
> clip_cpu mask is present earlier e.g. CPU hotplug. Iterate all CPUs in the
> mask
> to handle this case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pi-Cheng Chen <pi-cheng.c...@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 9 +++++++--
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> index 6509c61..5e90eb6 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> @@ -776,9 +776,14 @@ __cpufreq_cooling_register(struct device_node *np,
> char dev_name[THERMAL_NAME_LENGTH];
> struct cpufreq_frequency_table *pos, *table;
> unsigned int freq, i, num_cpus;
> - int ret;
> + int ret, cpu;
> +
> + for_each_cpu(cpu, clip_cpus) {
> + table = cpufreq_frequency_get_table(cpu);
> + if (table)
> + break;
> + }
>
> - table = cpufreq_frequency_get_table(cpumask_first(clip_cpus));
Nah, that's wrong. I hope that's a hypothetical problem and not a real
one. Would have been better if cpufreq maintainers were cc'd as they
can provide more insight into this :)
cpufreq_frequency_get_table() does: policy->freq_table and so it
doesn't matter if the cpu is online or not.
cpufreq_cpu_data was getting unset earlier on hotplug, but that's not
the case anymore. So nothing to worry about :)
--
viresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
