Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755483Ab3FMFkU (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jun 2013 01:40:20 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f47.google.com ([74.125.83.47]:51971 "EHLO mail-ee0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754055Ab3FMFkS (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jun 2013 01:40:18 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1371028189-15758-1-git-send-email-chenxg@marvell.com> Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 13:40:16 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] cpufreq: fix governor start/stop race condition From: Xiaoguang Chen To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Xiaoguang Chen , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , njiang1@marvell.com, zjwu@marvell.com, ylmao@marvell.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 772 Lines: 20 2013/6/12 Viresh Kumar : > On 12 June 2013 14:39, Xiaoguang Chen wrote: > >> ret = policy->governor->governor(policy, event); > > We again reached to the same problem. We shouldn't call > this between taking locks, otherwise recursive locks problems > would be seen again. But this is not the same lock as the deadlock case, it is a new lock, and only used in this function. no other functions use this lock. I don't know how can we get dead lock again? Thanks Xiaoguang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/