| Message ID | CAKohpomhvuQQ0JN3wgLBnrSpFUjC9J9QwWZpD9nA6AFYw+paKA@mail.gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, "Stephen Warren" <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: > > On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: > >> On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > >>> Well, it would be good to verify which part, then. > >> > >> Patch 2/7 appears to stop that message from being printed during > >> suspend, and perhaps reduce the number of times it's printed during > >> resume. Patch 7/7 stops the message being printed at all. > >> > >> Looking at patch 7, I wonder if it's simply because tegra_target() was > >> modified never to return -EBUSY, so the bug is still there, but it's > >> just been hidden. > > > > No, the bug is removed now. Its hidden in current linus/master :) > > I'm not sure what that means; I still see the message: I have given a better reply in one of the earlier mails in this thread. And skipped a more elaborative reply now. So this failure was always there since long time, as you disable your target() fn early in suspend. But the message wasn't printed earlier. A recently added core patch started printing this, so not a new bug. But this series fixes suspend resume completely and you wouldn't see it anymore. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> On 19-Feb-2014, at 10:56 pm, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: > >> On 02/18/2014 09:15 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >>> On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, "Stephen Warren" <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >>>>> On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: >>>>> On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Well, it would be good to verify which part, then. >>>>> >>>>> Patch 2/7 appears to stop that message from being printed during >>>>> suspend, and perhaps reduce the number of times it's printed during >>>>> resume. Patch 7/7 stops the message being printed at all. >>>>> >>>>> Looking at patch 7, I wonder if it's simply because tegra_target() was >>>>> modified never to return -EBUSY, so the bug is still there, but it's >>>>> just been hidden. >>>> >>>> No, the bug is removed now. Its hidden in current linus/master :) >>> >>> I'm not sure what that means; I still see the message: >> >> I have given a better reply in one of the earlier mails in this thread. >> And skipped a more elaborative reply now. >> >> So this failure was always there since long time, as you disable your >> target() fn early in suspend. But the message wasn't printed earlier. >> >> A recently added core patch started printing this, so not a new bug. >> But this series fixes suspend resume completely and you wouldn't see it >> anymore. > > OK, so I suppose we have two options: > > a) Just ignore the kernel error spew since it's a known issue. > > b) If I make the Tegra driver return 0 rather than -EBUSY, would that > work? It would certainly silence the error. However, I wonder if it > would cause the cpufreq core to get out of sync with HW; the core would > think that it'd set some frequency, which the driver ignored, and if it > later wanted to switch frequency, the call might get skipped because the > core thought the HW was already set to that frequency? Option is the one you need.-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> On 20-Feb-2014, at 7:19 am, Linaro <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: > > > >>> On 19-Feb-2014, at 10:56 pm, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On 02/18/2014 09:15 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >>>>> On 19-Feb-2014 1:48 AM, "Stephen Warren" <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 02/17/2014 02:20 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >>>>>> On 15 February 2014 05:33, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: >>>>>> On 02/14/2014 03:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> Well, it would be good to verify which part, then. >>>>>> >>>>>> Patch 2/7 appears to stop that message from being printed during >>>>>> suspend, and perhaps reduce the number of times it's printed during >>>>>> resume. Patch 7/7 stops the message being printed at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> Looking at patch 7, I wonder if it's simply because tegra_target() was >>>>>> modified never to return -EBUSY, so the bug is still there, but it's >>>>>> just been hidden. >>>>> >>>>> No, the bug is removed now. Its hidden in current linus/master :) >>>> >>>> I'm not sure what that means; I still see the message: >>> >>> I have given a better reply in one of the earlier mails in this thread. >>> And skipped a more elaborative reply now. >>> >>> So this failure was always there since long time, as you disable your >>> target() fn early in suspend. But the message wasn't printed earlier. >>> >>> A recently added core patch started printing this, so not a new bug. >>> But this series fixes suspend resume completely and you wouldn't see it >>> anymore. >> >> OK, so I suppose we have two options: >> >> a) Just ignore the kernel error spew since it's a known issue. >> >> b) If I make the Tegra driver return 0 rather than -EBUSY, would that >> work? It would certainly silence the error. However, I wonder if it >> would cause the cpufreq core to get out of sync with HW; the core would >> think that it'd set some frequency, which the driver ignored, and if it >> later wanted to switch frequency, the call might get skipped because the >> core thought the HW was already set to that frequency? > > Option is the one you need. Option a..-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 20 February 2014 23:10, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: > Well, except that still leaves a bunch of errors in the kernel log, and > I have to remember to ignore them:-/ Just for few releases, before this patchset goes in. > It'd be nice if the cpufreq core didn't keep changing its behaviour and > adding new error prints. It really should be up to the cpufreq drivers > to log the errors if they experience any. Hmm... not sure.. Its better to do error prints at a single place, i.e. cpufreq core on behalf of all drivers. If there is a error being returned from some routine, we better print a message for that. Rather than living in the illusion that everything is fine :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c index 2dfbb7e..48315e0 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -1326,8 +1326,7 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(struct device *dev, up_read(&policy->rwsem); if (cpu != policy->cpu) { - if (!frozen) - sysfs_remove_link(&dev->kobj, "cpufreq"); + sysfs_remove_link(&dev->kobj, "cpufreq"); } else if (cpus > 1) { new_cpu = cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu(policy, cpu);