From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752175AbaBXIux (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2014 03:50:53 -0500 Received: from mail-ob0-f177.google.com ([209.85.214.177]:45087 "EHLO mail-ob0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751480AbaBXIuw (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2014 03:50:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1393225072-3997-1-git-send-email-skannan@codeaurora.org> <530AF7E4.5080806@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 14:20:51 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Set policy to non-NULL only after all hotplug online work is done From: Viresh Kumar To: Saravana Kannan Cc: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 24 February 2014 14:17, wrote: > Sorry, not sure I understand what you mean. > > I agree, wording in my commit text might be unclear. I'll fix it after we > agree on the code fix. In the MSM case, each CPU has it's own policy. > > I'm assuming your original complaint was about my confusing wording. Maybe > that's not what you were pointing out? In your case each CPU has a separate policy structure as they have separately controllable clocks. But you also said that CPU0 is setting CPU1's governor to NULL. I don't see that happening. Each CPU sets its own governor to NULL on init().