On Thursday, November 21, 2013 09:56:32 AM Dirk Brandewie wrote:
On 11/21/2013 07:57 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 21 November 2013 18:41, Rafael J. Wysocki rjw@rjwysocki.net wrote:
On Thursday, November 21, 2013 12:39:02 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -1038,6 +1038,32 @@ static int __cpufreq_add_dev(struct device *dev, struct subsys_interface *sif,
if (has_target()) {ret = __cpufreq_driver_target(policy, policy->cur,CPUFREQ_RELATION_L);if (ret)pr_err("%s: Unable to set frequency from table: %d\n",__func__, ret);Should we continue in that case?
I wasn't sure. I thought maybe there are platforms which might not be ready for transitions so early and so an error message would be fine, as we will fail soon anyway in case there is a bug.
The scaling driver for the CPU has already loaded and its .init procedure has been called so .target better be callable.
Since the scaling driver is responsible maintaining the set of valid frequencies and setting policy->cur I think it is reasonable to have the scaling driver ensure that policy->cur returned from its .init and the operating frequency are in sync and match one of the values in its frequency table.
From that I infer that we should not continue on errors here. Which also is my
opinion.
Rafael