[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230829083521.trec3rjjmscqp2dw@vireshk-i7>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 14:05:21 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Chun-Jen Tseng (曾俊仁)
<Chun-Jen.Tseng@...iatek.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"sumitg@...dia.com" <sumitg@...dia.com>,
"sanjayc@...dia.com" <sanjayc@...dia.com>,
"rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group
<Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"matthias.bgg@...il.com" <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
"rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com"
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: mediatek: change transition delay for MT8186
On 29-08-23, 14:01, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Why exactly does the kernel crash here ? Any idea ?
Also note that cpufreq core has enough locking in place to make sure
two ->target_index() function calls don't run in parallel for the same
policy.
What may be happening in your case is that you are configuring a
common entity (CCI) from both the policies and there is no locking in
place to take care of the races.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists