On 29 October 2012 12:42, Amit Kachhap [off-list ref] wrote:

On 24 October 2012 17:28, hongbo.zhang [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

From: "hongbo.zhang" <redacted>

The cpufreq works as a cooling device, so the cooling layer should check if the
cpufreq driver is initialized or not.

Signed-off-by: hongbo.zhang <redacted>
---
 drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
index b6b4c2a..7519a0b 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c

@@ -354,6 +354,10 @@ struct thermal_cooling_device *cpufreq_cooling_register(
        int ret = 0, i;
        struct cpufreq_policy policy;

+       /* make sure cpufreq driver has been initialized */
+       if (!cpufreq_frequency_get_table(cpumask_any(clip_cpus)))
+               return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER);
+

Hi Hongbo,

I am not against this change but this might cause unnecessary delay in
probe thread. I also thought about it but have not put this
restriction. Actually you can put a check in platform_bind for this
condition and defer the binding till the time actual throttling
starts. So basically only after throttling cpufreq_table is needed.
(See my implementation exynos_thermal.c).

In fact, this piece of checking code was in my
db8500_cpufreq_cooling_probe() before, I will move it back there
again, and the ST-E's policy is separating cooling devs and thermal
zone, so cannot be in binding function on my platform, only in probe
function instead.

Thanks,
Amit Daniel

quoted

        list_for_each_entry(cpufreq_dev, &cooling_cpufreq_list, node)
                cpufreq_dev_count++;

--
1.7.11.3


_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev