Re: [PATCH] cpufreq, store_scaling_governor requires policy->rwsem to be held for duration of changing governors [v2]

[Prarit Bhargava]

On 10/13/2014 06:43 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 1 August 2014 22:48, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 08/01/14 03:27, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>>>
>>> Can you send me the test and the trace of the deadlock?  I'm not creating it with:
>>>
>>
>> This was with conservative as the default, and switching to ondemand
>>
>> # cd /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/cpufreq
>> # ls
>> affected_cpus                  scaling_available_governors
>> conservative                   scaling_cur_freq
>> cpuinfo_cur_freq               scaling_driver
>> cpuinfo_max_freq               scaling_governor
>> cpuinfo_min_freq               scaling_max_freq
>> cpuinfo_transition_latency     scaling_min_freq
>> related_cpus                   scaling_setspeed
>> scaling_available_frequencies  stats
>> # cat conservative/down_threshold
>> 20
>> # echo ondemand > scaling_governor
>>
>>  ======================================================
>>  [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
>>  3.16.0-rc3-00039-ge1e38f124d87 #47 Not tainted
>>  -------------------------------------------------------
>>  sh/75 is trying to acquire lock:
>>   (s_active#9){++++..}, at: [<c0358a94>] kernfs_remove_by_name_ns+0x3c/0x84
> 
> Can you please retry this on mainline? I wasn't able to reproduce it
> now over 3.17.
> I am trying this on Exynos b.L implementation..

I have 100% reproducibility on latest mainline.

Viresh, please see my next post on the locking issues in cpufreq.

P.

> 
--
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/