[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150709040445.GG1805@linux>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 09:34:45 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Kernel splat when taking CPUs offline
On 09-07-15, 02:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> So the cpufreq driver's ->get() callback returns 0 for the given CPU and
> that's what triggers the WARN_ON(). And it most likely returns 0, because
> its internal data structure for that CPU is not present.
>
> I *guess* that before the above commit policy was NULL in cpufreq_update_policy()
> and we didn't get to the point where ->get() was called.
I am not sure if that behavior should have changed at all.. Earlier we
were clearing per-cpu cpufreq_cpu_data for offline CPUs and so policy
would have been NULL for offline CPUs.
Now that per-cpu variable isn't cleared, but cpufreq_cpu_get() does
check if the CPU is part of policy->cpus or not, i.e. if it is
offline. And so policy should still be NULL for offline CPUs.
I think it might be related to what I chased down yesterday:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=143633485824975&w=2
@Steven: Can you please give this a try ?
--
viresh
--
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