From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: viresh.kumar@linaro.org (Viresh Kumar)
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 11:43:24 +0530
Subject: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: Don't destroy/realloc policy/sysfs on
 hotplug/suspend
In-Reply-To: <53C0A648.9080909@codeaurora.org>
References: <1404959850-11617-1-git-send-email-skannan@codeaurora.org>
 <1405052287-4744-1-git-send-email-skannan@codeaurora.org>
 <CAKohponB9feyh50p+dL5hyU1ffHAzHU59G-sYCrCm1AbHQe9hw@mail.gmail.com>
 <53C0A648.9080909@codeaurora.org>
Message-ID: <CAKohpokdvtPj7jg88mon+EnHRCbUF7nqFWvmkFEMVh5WRzSS5A@mail.gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 12 July 2014 08:36, Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 07/10/2014 11:19 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
>>
>> Please make sure you take care of these issues:
>> - suspend/resume
>> - hotplug
>> - module insert/remove
>
> Ok, I was just at the current code. Does cpufreq_unregister_driver() even
> really work correctly as it stands?
>
> It doesn't even seem to stop any of the governors/policies before it just
> set the cpufreq_driver pointer to NULL.
>
> So, technically my v2 patch doesn't even make anything worse when it comes
> to unregistering the cpufreq driver.

Are you really sure about this? I have tested this *myself* earlier..

subsys_interface_unregister() should take care of stopping/freeing governor
stuff..