[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4871E657.3040403@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 15:18:07 +0530
From: Nageswara R Sastry <rnsastry@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
davej@...emonkey.org.uk
Subject: Re: [BUG] While changing the cpufreq governor, kernel hits a bug
in workqueue.c
Hi Johannes,
>>> =======================================================
>>> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
>>> 2.6.25.7.cpufreq_patch #2
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
[...]
>> Okay, the problem is in cpufreq_conservative.c. We
>> cancel_delayed_work_sync() while holding the mutex, but the work itself
>> tries to grab it and there it deadlocks; lockdep caught that right.
>>
>> The hunk for _ondemand is correct, but the one for _conservative is
>> obviously wrong, sorry :/
>>
>> I will whip something up and get back to you. Thanks a lot for
>> testing!
>
> Could you try the attached patch instead of the one above?
>
> Dave, I dropped the mutex-grabbing from the conservative worker function
> as well as I don't see a reason for it, please correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> Hannes
>
The script is running now for more than 6 hours successfully, I will
continue this and let you know if there are any failures.
* I am seeing the circular locking dependency with the above patch too.
Thanks!!
Regards
R.Nageswara Sastry
--
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