The call to cpufreq_update_policy() is placed in the CPU hotplug callback
of cpufreq_stats, which has a higher priority than the CPU hotplug callback
of cpufreq-core. As a result, during CPU_ONLINE/CPU_ONLINE_FROZEN, we end up
calling cpufreq_update_policy() *before* calling cpufreq_add_dev() !
And for uninitialized CPUs, it just returns silently, not doing anything.

To add to that, cpufreq_stats is not even the right place to call
cpufreq_update_policy() to begin with. The cpufreq core ought to handle
this in its own callback, from an elegance/relevance perspective.

So move the invocation of cpufreq_update_policy() to cpufreq_cpu_callback,
and place it *after* cpufreq_add_dev().
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>