[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20061129130556.d20c726e.akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 13:05:56 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To: ego@...ibm.com
Cc: mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...l.org,
davej@...hat.com, dipankar@...ibm.com, vatsa@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: CPUFREQ-CPUHOTPLUG: Possible circular locking dependency
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 20:54:04 +0530
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com> wrote:
> Ok, so to cut the long story short,
> - While changing governor from anything to
> ondemand, locks are taken in the following order
>
> policy->lock ===> dbs_mutex ===> workqueue_mutex.
>
> - While offlining a cpu, locks are taken in the following order
>
> cpu_add_remove_lock ==> sched_hotcpu_mutex ==> workqueue_mutex ==
> ==> cache_chain_mutex ==> policy->lock.
What functions are taking all these locks? (ie: the callpath?)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists