lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Sep]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] cpufreq: return EEXIST instead of EBUSY for second registering
From
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> On Thursday, September 19, 2013 10:30:04 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
>> > On 20 September 2013 07:01, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> wrote:
>> >> Sorry, looks like this one is not enough.
>
> Well, I've already applied this one and it makes sense to me anyway.

you can keep that.

>
>> >> please let me know if you prefer me send addon patch
>> >> or revised one.
>> >
>> > Atleast you can let us know what the problem is? And then we
>> > can decide on that.. But anyway, you can send a new patch
>> > based over latest linux-next (which will have your original patch),
>> > and then leave it onto Rafael to merge it or have two patches..
>> > (though I am quite sure he will not drop anything now, unless its
>> > too screwed.., at worst he might revert it..)..
>>
>> looks like the crash is intermittent..., so i thought that patch fixed
>> the problem.
>> but later I found other suspicious print out.
>
> So, does it mean that the $subject patch fixes the issue for you to some
> extent, but more changes are necessary to make it go away completely?

yes.

>
>> please check new one:
>>
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2915181/
>
> I see.
>
> I *think* we can just drop the module requesting stuff entirely, because it
> doesn't seem to work anyway and udev is handling this for us.

looks some nehalem/westmere based system may need it when they have
several SSDTs. will double check that.

Thanks

Yinghai


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-09-20 19:41    [W:0.040 / U:3.316 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site