Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 08-04-16, 23:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> >> Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for >> cpufreq_s

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 08-04-16, 23:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki >> Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for >> cpufreq_suspended set >> >> Since governor operations are gener

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 08-04-16, 23:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> > Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for > cpufreq_suspended set > > Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended > i

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 08-04-16, 23:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for > cpufreq_suspended set > > Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended > is set, do nothing at all in cpuf

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On Friday, April 08, 2016 11:14:14 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 08-04-16, 00:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thursday, April 07, 2016 05:35:03 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > > That's *ugly* and it works by chance, unless I am misreading it > > > completely. > > > > I'm assuming that what you

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On Friday, April 08, 2016 11:14:14 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 08-04-16, 00:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thursday, April 07, 2016 05:35:03 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > > That's *ugly* and it works by chance, unless I am misreading it > > > completely. > > > > I'm assuming that what you

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

rg> Thanks! However, since I'm going to apply https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8777561/ to pm-cpufreq-sched, I will only apply the first hunk of the $subject one, ie. the patch below. I assume that the ACK still applies. :-) I'll take it for v4.6, because it fixes up a commit already in

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

to pm-cpufreq-sched, I will only apply the first hunk of the $subject one, ie. the patch below. I assume that the ACK still applies. :-) I'll take it for v4.6, because it fixes up a commit already in there. --- From: Rafael J. Wysocki Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 07-04-16, 03:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended > is set, do nothing at all in cpufreq_start_governor() and > cpufreq_exit_governor() in that case. > > In particular, this

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 07-04-16, 03:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended > is set, do nothing at all in cpufreq_start_governor() and > cpufreq_exit_governor() in that case. > > In particular, this prevents fast frequency

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 08-04-16, 00:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, April 07, 2016 05:35:03 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > > That's *ugly* and it works by chance, unless I am misreading it > > completely. > > I'm assuming that what you mean by "ugly" here is "not really > straightforward", > which I agree

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 08-04-16, 00:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, April 07, 2016 05:35:03 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > > That's *ugly* and it works by chance, unless I am misreading it > > completely. > > I'm assuming that what you mean by "ugly" here is "not really > straightforward", > which I agree

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On Thursday, April 07, 2016 05:35:03 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 07-04-16, 13:44, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > I'm not sure I'm following. > > > > Without this patch fast switch is disabled when we offline the nonboot > > CPUs during suspend, because cpufreq_exit_governor() runs then, but > > the

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On Thursday, April 07, 2016 05:35:03 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 07-04-16, 13:44, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > I'm not sure I'm following. > > > > Without this patch fast switch is disabled when we offline the nonboot > > CPUs during suspend, because cpufreq_exit_governor() runs then, but > > the

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 07-04-16, 13:44, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > I'm not sure I'm following. > > Without this patch fast switch is disabled when we offline the nonboot > CPUs during suspend, because cpufreq_exit_governor() runs then, but > the cpufreq_governor() called by it does nothing. Also >

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 07-04-16, 13:44, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > I'm not sure I'm following. > > Without this patch fast switch is disabled when we offline the nonboot > CPUs during suspend, because cpufreq_exit_governor() runs then, but > the cpufreq_governor() called by it does nothing. Also >

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 07-04-16, 13:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:28 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> > On 07-04-16, 03:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 07-04-16, 13:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:28 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> > On 07-04-16, 03:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki >> >> >> >> Since governor operations are generally skipped

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 07-04-16, 13:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:28 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 07-04-16, 03:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki > >> > >> Since governor operations are generally skipped if

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 07-04-16, 13:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:28 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 07-04-16, 03:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki > >> > >> Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended > >> is set, do nothing at all in

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:28 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 07-04-16, 03:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki >> >> Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended >> is set, do nothing at all in

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:28 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 07-04-16, 03:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki >> >> Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended >> is set, do nothing at all in cpufreq_start_governor() and >> cpufreq_exit_governor() in that

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 07-04-16, 03:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended > is set, do nothing at all in cpufreq_start_governor() and > cpufreq_exit_governor() in that case. > > In particular, this

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

On 07-04-16, 03:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended > is set, do nothing at all in cpufreq_start_governor() and > cpufreq_exit_governor() in that case. > > In particular, this prevents fast frequency

[PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

From: Rafael J. Wysocki Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended is set, do nothing at all in cpufreq_start_governor() and cpufreq_exit_governor() in that case. In particular, this prevents fast frequency switching from being disabled

[PATCH] cpufreq: Skip all governor-related actions for cpufreq_suspended set

From: Rafael J. Wysocki Since governor operations are generally skipped if cpufreq_suspended is set, do nothing at all in cpufreq_start_governor() and cpufreq_exit_governor() in that case. In particular, this prevents fast frequency switching from being disabled after a suspend-to-RAM cycle on