From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7EDCC606D7 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 07:26:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D98B216C4 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 07:26:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="apgBZ4X6" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726704AbfGIH0T (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Jul 2019 03:26:19 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f196.google.com ([209.85.215.196]:42390 "EHLO mail-pg1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725985AbfGIH0T (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Jul 2019 03:26:19 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f196.google.com with SMTP id t132so8976280pgb.9 for ; Tue, 09 Jul 2019 00:26:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=VU++xFR4UeS5wi0kjYAOOzJHg9p99MkOSC469PWKtiE=; b=apgBZ4X6rGUau8HDn6zxvjaAbzKsFih4+juV1oPlI/6mu5bLVrqKrL1DcuiEVk6qym NBwY8pHMoa4Fr6d4fLhivIAJbt4/tpElXsML8xmXZBJvB924rYqGC9jEwi8JP2ywcFWI GXu9KqIs5AcfK15LuIU6FDabc2YEaDAgooke+emPmxg5fO5p4j+/FJIZ4WnAXgXEHRob zTH/fDXaeMq2qFXxtWO9oIn6v23ByzeTHqx7E+qh7isXghw3Y5GNvVWmNytfboHsKFcZ Z57F4nuzERn5O+E3oSH6FDR9pFBWdO1mTbNsKwdbx6+z0ayFPu3Y0E67R0s6ALtz7VrX 7fYw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=VU++xFR4UeS5wi0kjYAOOzJHg9p99MkOSC469PWKtiE=; b=j5WSnvvmEdzn9lM3fdmEqk7amvXjHC0TcTiLLIyQskitj919msi9CXtQD02HS9TTLI /9w2CJwMxrCxVEcgUAzJpR008bNOvnUg7ovNh0eAe15Bk87wD6/WMy77Aj72BrP/zTCe ldDLQR3SXXcFROl4BV09EsAjnoxuasu6z4K0B5nh3b5U7fRkpjUbPy7xvad6RzXiZevV LbSSV2wmbCcozaogqcYyVTPhHYKMtegWvtDK9md5vrMP/nEWqPZS0r+U0nDSSH1j7wmB C7iElpBVBy5o8CkILuJUtQUb8sTKiIXYv7WGnHq4k45O4o/iK1iZ8AOwSSS2r9VAi5t/ EVTA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVXP1/k9Upmjdmjek1jOpp0eF/fM/AKT1/MpH3COYto/x0oyFIW O2YAJnNsJ/AHg85E5Aq07MfWqg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxrf8g/VrlI7miB6XEk8mRZC3zQZQMxO667s/7gnRYvdWVTPaqo0bYulUdlitI+2Q83bRT8cg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:b104:: with SMTP id z4mr30906790pjq.102.1562657178825; Tue, 09 Jul 2019 00:26:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([122.172.28.117]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j20sm7155992pfr.113.2019.07.09.00.26.17 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Jul 2019 00:26:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 12:56:16 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar To: Pavel Machek Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Matthias Kaehlcke , Ulf Hansson , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux-pm mailing list , kernel list , Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: cpufreq notifiers break suspend -- Re: suspend broken in next-20190704 on Thinkpad X60 Message-ID: <20190709072616.bt2754numhdnjb3t@vireshk-i7> References: <20190704192020.GA3771@amd> <20190705185001.GA4068@amd> <20190706203032.GA26828@amd> <20190708030505.kvrg6sh6bd4xzzwa@vireshk-i7> <20190708092840.ynibtrntval6krc4@vireshk-i7> <20190708141302.GA7436@amd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190708141302.GA7436@amd> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52 Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On 08-07-19, 16:13, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Mon 2019-07-08 14:58:40, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > Though it makes me wonder why I didn't hit this thing. I was using the > > cpu_cooling device the other day, which calls cpufreq_update_policy() > > very frequently on heat-up. And I had a hair dryer blowing over my > > board to heat it up. Lemme check that again :) > > Can you test on some x86 ACPI? No dryers needed :-). > Found out why I didn't hit it then. I tested it after converting cpu_cooling driver to use QoS APIs and there is no double locking with that. -- viresh