From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755937AbaGaB5l (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2014 21:57:41 -0400 Received: from v094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:59907 "HELO v094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751028AbaGaB5j (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2014 21:57:39 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Saravana Kannan Cc: Prarit Bhargava , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Viresh Kumar , Lenny Szubowicz , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq, store_scaling_governor requires policy->rwsem to be held for duration of changing governors [v2] Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 04:16:13 +0200 Message-ID: <3140593.vs3eOK6CdF@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.16.0-rc5+; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <53D99D80.8090905@codeaurora.org> References: <1406634362-811-1-git-send-email-prarit@redhat.com> <1816455.s1k7EgIPj9@vostro.rjw.lan> <53D99D80.8090905@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 06:36:00 PM Saravana Kannan wrote: > On 07/30/2014 02:40 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 10:18:25 AM Prarit Bhargava wrote: > >> > >> On 07/29/2014 08:03 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 07:46:02 AM Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > > > [cut] > > > >>>> This patch effectively reverts commit 955ef483. > > The issue reported in this patch is valid. We are seeing that internally > too. I believe I reported it in another thread (within the past month). > > However, the original patch fixes a real deadlock issue (I'm too tired > to look it up now). We can revet the original, but it's going to bring > back the original issue. I just want to make sure Prarit and Raphael > realize this before proceeding. > > I do have plans for a proper fix for the mainline (not stable branches), > but plan to do that after the current set of suspend/hotplug patches go > through. The fix would be easier to make after that. > > >>> > >>> OK, I'm convinced by this. > >>> > >>> I suppose we should push it for -stable from 3.10 through 3.15.x, right? > >> > >> Rafael, I think that is a good idea. I'm not sure what the protocol is for > >> adding stable@kernel.org though ... > > > > I'll take care of this, thanks! > > > > But you aren't going to pull the in for the next release, right? What do you mean? Rafael