Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 3 Jul 2009 08:54:27 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch 0/4] Take care of cpufreq lockdep issues (take 2) |
| |
* venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com <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 <mingo@elte.hu>
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
| |