Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754951AbZGCGzF (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 02:55:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752216AbZGCGyz (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 02:54:55 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:34304 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751268AbZGCGyy (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 02:54:54 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 08:54:27 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com Cc: Dave Jones , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, kernel-testers@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Dave Young , Pekka Enberg , Mathieu Desnoyers , Thomas Renninger Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] Take care of cpufreq lockdep issues (take 2) Message-ID: <20090703065427.GA32687@elte.hu> References: <20090703000829.735976000@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090703000829.735976000@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1708 Lines: 43 * venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com wrote: > Since recent chanegs to ondemand and conservative governor, there > have been multiple reports of lockdep issues in cpufreq. Patch > series takes care of these problems. > > This is the next attempt following the one here, which was not a > complete fix. > http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0906.3/01073.html > > I am currently running some stress tests to make sure there are no > issues with these patches. But, wanted to send them out for > review/comments/testing before I head out for the long weekend. > > If this patchset seems sane, the first patch in the patchset > should also get into 30.stable. Btw., FYI, because my test-systems were frequently triggering those bugs, i kept testing the following series from you and Mathieu in -tip: ecf8b04: cpufreq: Define dbs_mutex purpose and cleanup its usage conservative gov b08c597: cpufreq: Define dbs_mutex purpose and cleanup its usage 0807e30: cpufreq: remove rwsem lock from CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP call (second call site) So that fix-series, while probably not complete (given that you sent a v2 series), worked well in practice and gets my: Tested-by: Ingo Molnar Is the delta between this (tested) series and your v2 version significant? If not it might make sense to shape it as a delta patch to the v1 series, if that looks clean enough - to preserve testing results. Ingo -- 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/