lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
From
Date

> I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed by the voluminous output of this checker.
> Especially as (directly at least) cpufreq doesn't touch vma's, or mmap's.

the reporter doesn't have CONFIG_KALLSYMS_ALL enabled which gives
sometimes misleading backtraces (should lockdep just enable KALLSYMS_ALL
to get more useful bugreports?)

the problem is this, there are 2 scenarios in this bug:

One
---
store_scaling_governor takes policy->lock and then calls __cpufreq_set_policy
__cpufreq_set_policy calls __cpufreq_governor
__cpufreq_governor calls __cpufreq_driver_target via cpufreq_governor_performance
__cpufreq_driver_target calls lock_cpu_hotplug() (which takes the hotplug lock)

Two
---
cpufreq_stats_init lock_cpu_hotplug() and then calls cpufreq_stat_cpu_callback
cpufreq_stat_cpu_callback calls cpufreq_update_policy
cpufreq_update_policy takes the policy->lock

so this looks like a real honest AB-BA deadlock to me...


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-05-30 07:48    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site