Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754426AbYHLQBe (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:01:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753900AbYHLQBY (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:01:24 -0400 Received: from ns1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:58918 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753689AbYHLQBX (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:01:23 -0400 From: Thomas Renninger Organization: SUSE Linux - Novell To: Milan Broz Subject: Re: 2.6.27-rc1 and 2.6.26.1: critical thermal shutdown on thinkpad x60 (bisected) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:01:18 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Pavel Machek , Andi Kleen , kernel list , ACPI mailing list , Alexey Starikovskiy , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" , stable@kernel.org References: <20080806090246.GA1572@elf.ucw.cz> <48A1A4F6.9080706@redhat.com> <48A1B0CB.9050908@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <48A1B0CB.9050908@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200808121801.21374.trenn@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2153 Lines: 59 On Tuesday 12 August 2008 17:48:27 Milan Broz wrote: > >>>> yes. maybe some userspace tool controlling frequency is involved, no > >>>> idea yet. But it is 2.6.26 tree for sure. > >>> > >>> So it definitely is in 2.6.26.2, and it definitely is in 2.6.26? > > > > The bug is _not_ in 2.6.26, it was introduced in 2.6.26.1. > > > > The problem is, that now the CPU frequency doesn't decrease at some > > temperature level and fan is unable to cool it properly. Hmm, the machine should still not shut down. We need the virtual passive trip point... > > > > bisect on 2.6.26.y tree finished in this patch: > > (I expect similar patch in 2.6.27-rc) > > > > commit 04f496871e8af87a1e40c504371a206fd7389193 > > Author: Thomas Renninger > > Date: Wed Jul 30 18:20:10 2008 +0000 > > and this seems to fix it for me: > -- > > Do not use unsigned int if there is test for negative number... > > See drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c > static unsigned int ignore_ppc = -1; > ... > if (event == CPUFREQ_START && ignore_ppc <= 0) { > ignore_ppc = 0; > ... > > Signed-off-by: Milan Broz > --- > drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > Index: linux-2.6.26.y/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-2.6.26.y.orig/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c 2008-08-12 > 17:20:07.000000000 +0200 +++ > linux-2.6.26.y/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c 2008-08-12 > 17:35:53.000000000 +0200 @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ static > DEFINE_MUTEX(performance_mutex); > * 0 -> cpufreq low level drivers initialized -> consider _PPC values > * 1 -> ignore _PPC totally -> forced by user through boot param > */ > -static unsigned int ignore_ppc = -1; > +static int ignore_ppc = -1; Ohh dear..., what kind of obvious bug have I introduced. Thanks a lot! Thomas -- 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/