Re: [PATCH] cpufreq, store_scaling_governor requires policy->rwsem to be held for duration of changing governors [v2]
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Wed Jul 30 2014 - 21:57:43 EST
On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 06:36:00 PM Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On 07/30/2014 02:40 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 10:18:25 AM Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> >> On 07/29/2014 08:03 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 07:46:02 AM Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> > [cut]
> >>>> This patch effectively reverts commit 955ef483.
> The issue reported in this patch is valid. We are seeing that internally
> too. I believe I reported it in another thread (within the past month).
> However, the original patch fixes a real deadlock issue (I'm too tired
> to look it up now). We can revet the original, but it's going to bring
> back the original issue. I just want to make sure Prarit and Raphael
> realize this before proceeding.
> I do have plans for a proper fix for the mainline (not stable branches),
> but plan to do that after the current set of suspend/hotplug patches go
> through. The fix would be easier to make after that.
> >>> OK, I'm convinced by this.
> >>> I suppose we should push it for -stable from 3.10 through 3.15.x, right?
> >> Rafael, I think that is a good idea. I'm not sure what the protocol is for
> >> adding stable@xxxxxxxxxx though ...
> > I'll take care of this, thanks!
> But you aren't going to pull the in for the next release, right?
What do you mean?
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/