mirror of
https://mirrors.bfsu.edu.cn/git/linux.git
synced 2024-11-18 17:54:13 +08:00
9c9a43ed27
I just stumbled on this bug/feature, this is how to reproduce it: # echo 450000 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_min_freq # echo 450000 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_max_freq # echo powersave > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_governor # cpufreq-info -p 450000 450000 powersave # echo 1800000 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_min_freq ; echo $? 0 # cpufreq-info -p 450000 450000 powersave Here it is. The kernel refuses to set a min_freq higher than the max_freq but it allows a max_freq lower than min_freq (lowering min_freq also). This behaviour is pretty straightforward (but undocumented) and it doesn't return an error altough failing to accomplish the requested action (set min_freq). The problem (IMO) is basically that userspace is not allowed to set a full policy atomically while the kernel always does that thus it must enforce an ordering on operations. The attached patch returns -EINVAL if trying to increase frequencies starting from scaling_min_freq and documents the correct ordering of writes. Signed-off-by: Mattia Dongili <malattia@linux.it> Signed-off-by: Dominik Brodowski <linux at dominikbrodowski.net> Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> -- |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| amd-powernow.txt | ||
| core.txt | ||
| cpu-drivers.txt | ||
| cpufreq-nforce2.txt | ||
| cpufreq-stats.txt | ||
| governors.txt | ||
| index.txt | ||
| user-guide.txt | ||