Re: remove cpu hotplug bustification in cpufreq.

[Linus Torvalds]

On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> 
> I thought just the 'ondemand' governor was a problem?

The ondemand governor seems to be singled out not because it has unique 
problems, but because it seems to be used by Fedora Core for some strange 
reason.

I would judge that any bugs in cpufreq_ondemand.c are likely equally 
evident in cpufreq_conservative.c, for example. I think the two have the 
same background, and seem to have the same broken locking.

> That thing has been broken since day 1 AFAICT.  There are lots of
> reports of problems with it on the list.

See above. I seriously doubt this is ondemand-specific. The whole cpufreq 
locking seems to be very screwed up.

The current -git tree will complain about some of the more obvious 
problems. If you see a "Lukewarm IQ" message, it's a sign of somebody 
re-taking a cpu lock that is already held.

			Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/