cpufreq: Remove unused HOTPLUG_CPU code

Because the sibling cpu of any online cpu is identified very early in
cpufreq_add_dev(), below code is never executed. And so can be removed.

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: Create a macro for unlock_policy_rwsem{read,write}

On the lines of macro: lock_policy_rwsem, we can create another macro for
unlock_policy_rwsem. Lets do it.

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: Fix locking issues

cpufreq core uses two locks:
- cpufreq_driver_lock: General lock for driver and cpufreq_cpu_data array.
- cpu_policy_rwsemfix locking: per CPU reader-writer semaphore designed to cure
  all cpufreq/hotplug/workqueue/etc related lock issues.

These locks were not used properly and are placed against their principle
(present before their definition) at various places. This patch is an attempt to
fix their use.

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: Retrieve current frequency from scaling drivers with internal governors

Scaling drivers that implement the cpufreq_driver.setpolicy() versus
the cpufreq_driver.target() interface do not set policy->cur.

Normally policy->cur is set during the call to cpufreq_driver.target()
when the frequnecy request is made by the governor.

If the scaling driver implements cpufreq_driver.setpolicy() and
cpufreq_driver.get() interfaces use cpufreq_driver.get() to retrieve
the current frequency.

Signed-off-by: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.j.brandewie@intel.com>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: Only call cpufreq_out_of_sync() for driver that implement cpufreq_driver.target()

Scaling drivers that implement cpufreq_driver.setpolicy() have
internal governors that do not signal changes via
cpufreq_notify_transition() so the frequncy in the policy will almost
certainly be different than the current frequncy.  Only call
cpufreq_out_of_sync() when the underlying driver implements
cpufreq_driver.target()

Signed-off-by: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.j.brandewie@intel.com>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: Do not track governor name for scaling drivers with internal governors.

Scaling drivers that implement internal governors do not have governor
structures assocaited with them.  Only track the name of the governor
associated with the CPU if the driver does not implement
cpufreq_driver.setpolicy()

Signed-off-by: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.j.brandewie@intel.com>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: Convert the cpufreq_driver_lock to a rwlock

This eliminates the contention I am seeing in __cpufreq_cpu_get.
It also nicely stages the lock to be replaced by the rcu.

Signed-off-by: Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@sgi.com>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: Call __cpufreq_governor() with correct policy->cpus mask

__cpufreq_governor() must be called with a correct policy->cpus mask.
In __cpufreq_remove_dev() we initially clear policy->cpus with
cpumask_clear_cpu() and then call
__cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT). If the governor
is doing some per-cpu stuff in EXIT callback, this can create
uncertain behavior.

Generic governors in drivers/cpufreq/ doesn't do any per-cpu stuff
in EXIT callback and so we don't face any issues currently. But its
better to keep the code clean, so we don't face any issues in future.

Now, we call cpumask_clear_cpu() only when multiple cpus are managed
by policy.

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
cpufreq: Preserve sysfs files across suspend/resume

The file permissions of cpufreq per-cpu sysfs files are not preserved
across suspend/resume because we internally go through the CPU
Hotplug path which reinitializes the file permissions on CPU online.

But the user is not supposed to know that we are using CPU hotplug
internally within suspend/resume (IOW, the kernel should not silently
wreck the user-set file permissions across a suspend cycle).
Therefore, we need to preserve the file permissions as they are
across suspend/resume.

The simplest way to achieve that is to just not touch the sysfs files
at all - ie., just ignore the CPU hotplug notifications in the
suspend/resume path (_FROZEN) in the cpufreq hotplug callback.

Reported-by: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@intel.com>
Reported-by: Durgadoss R <durgadoss.r@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>