* next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one @ 2013-02-06 17:44 Valdis Kletnieks 2013-02-06 21:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Valdis Kletnieks @ 2013-02-06 17:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: linux-kernel, cpufreq, linux-pm [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2572 bytes --] Seen in dmesg. next-20130128 was OK. Haven't done a bisect, but can do so if the offender isn't obvious... [ 2.567662] netconsole: network logging started [ 2.581661] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 2.581670] WARNING: at fs/sysfs/dir.c:536 sysfs_add_one+0x91/0xa5() [ 2.581673] Hardware name: Latitude E6500 [ 2.581676] sysfs: cannot create duplicate filename '/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand' [ 2.581678] Modules linked in: [ 2.581684] Pid: 1, comm: swapper/0 Tainted: G W 3.8.0-rc6-next-20130206 #57 [ 2.581687] Call Trace: [ 2.581693] [<ffffffff811713d6>] ? sysfs_add_one+0x91/0xa5 [ 2.581700] [<ffffffff8102ecdc>] warn_slowpath_common+0x7c/0x96 [ 2.581706] [<ffffffff8102ed3d>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x47/0x49 [ 2.581711] [<ffffffff811713d6>] sysfs_add_one+0x91/0xa5 [ 2.581716] [<ffffffff81171521>] create_dir+0x6b/0xa4 [ 2.581721] [<ffffffff81171787>] sysfs_create_subdir+0x17/0x19 [ 2.581727] [<ffffffff81172e76>] internal_create_group+0xd4/0x1df [ 2.581732] [<ffffffff81172f8f>] sysfs_create_group+0xe/0x10 [ 2.581739] [<ffffffff813e033a>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x209/0x475 [ 2.581744] [<ffffffff813df187>] od_cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x15/0x17 [ 2.581750] [<ffffffff813dd6ab>] __cpufreq_governor+0x61/0xb5 [ 2.581755] [<ffffffff813dd803>] __cpufreq_set_policy+0x104/0x140 [ 2.581761] [<ffffffff81609303>] cpufreq_add_dev_interface+0x217/0x261 [ 2.581767] [<ffffffff813de5ed>] ? cpufreq_update_policy+0x133/0x133 [ 2.581773] [<ffffffff813dddc9>] cpufreq_add_dev+0x222/0x2d7 [ 2.581780] [<ffffffff812dc7da>] subsys_interface_register+0xa3/0xd7 [ 2.581786] [<ffffffff8160e6c9>] ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x72/0x80 [ 2.581792] [<ffffffff813dd1ae>] cpufreq_register_driver+0x9c/0x13b [ 2.581799] [<ffffffff81d778ed>] ? cpufreq_gov_dbs_init+0x2c/0x2c [ 2.581805] [<ffffffff81d77968>] acpi_cpufreq_init+0x7b/0x185 [ 2.581811] [<ffffffff8100023a>] do_one_initcall+0x7a/0x130 [ 2.581817] [<ffffffff81d4ddfb>] kernel_init_freeable+0x15e/0x1df [ 2.581822] [<ffffffff81d4d6f2>] ? do_early_param+0x88/0x88 [ 2.581828] [<ffffffff815f9568>] ? rest_init+0x12c/0x12c [ 2.581833] [<ffffffff815f9571>] kernel_init+0x9/0xd1 [ 2.581839] [<ffffffff81614bec>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0 [ 2.581844] [<ffffffff815f9568>] ? rest_init+0x12c/0x12c [ 2.581847] ---[ end trace a0eea8e0db3a3905 ]--- [ 2.585909] ALSA device list: [ 2.585913] #0: HDA Intel at 0xf6fdc000 irq 48 [ 2.590781] Freeing unused kernel memory: 852k freed [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 865 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one 2013-02-06 17:44 next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one Valdis Kletnieks @ 2013-02-06 21:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2013-02-07 0:55 ` Valdis.Kletnieks 2013-02-07 7:41 ` Viresh Kumar 0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-02-06 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Valdis Kletnieks; +Cc: linux-kernel, cpufreq, linux-pm, Viresh Kumar On Wednesday, February 06, 2013 12:44:35 PM Valdis Kletnieks wrote: > Seen in dmesg. next-20130128 was OK. Haven't done a bisect, but can > do so if the offender isn't obvious... I suppose this is 73bf0fc "cpufreq: Don't remove sysfs link for policy->cpu". Can you test the linux-pm.git/pm-cpufreq branch alone, please, and see if that's this one (top-most commit)? Even if it is, it is a bug fix, so we'll need one fix more on top of it, but can you please confirm? Rafael > [ 2.567662] netconsole: network logging started > [ 2.581661] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 2.581670] WARNING: at fs/sysfs/dir.c:536 sysfs_add_one+0x91/0xa5() > [ 2.581673] Hardware name: Latitude E6500 > [ 2.581676] sysfs: cannot create duplicate filename '/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand' > [ 2.581678] Modules linked in: > [ 2.581684] Pid: 1, comm: swapper/0 Tainted: G W 3.8.0-rc6-next-20130206 #57 > [ 2.581687] Call Trace: > [ 2.581693] [<ffffffff811713d6>] ? sysfs_add_one+0x91/0xa5 > [ 2.581700] [<ffffffff8102ecdc>] warn_slowpath_common+0x7c/0x96 > [ 2.581706] [<ffffffff8102ed3d>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x47/0x49 > [ 2.581711] [<ffffffff811713d6>] sysfs_add_one+0x91/0xa5 > [ 2.581716] [<ffffffff81171521>] create_dir+0x6b/0xa4 > [ 2.581721] [<ffffffff81171787>] sysfs_create_subdir+0x17/0x19 > [ 2.581727] [<ffffffff81172e76>] internal_create_group+0xd4/0x1df > [ 2.581732] [<ffffffff81172f8f>] sysfs_create_group+0xe/0x10 > [ 2.581739] [<ffffffff813e033a>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x209/0x475 > [ 2.581744] [<ffffffff813df187>] od_cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x15/0x17 > [ 2.581750] [<ffffffff813dd6ab>] __cpufreq_governor+0x61/0xb5 > [ 2.581755] [<ffffffff813dd803>] __cpufreq_set_policy+0x104/0x140 > [ 2.581761] [<ffffffff81609303>] cpufreq_add_dev_interface+0x217/0x261 > [ 2.581767] [<ffffffff813de5ed>] ? cpufreq_update_policy+0x133/0x133 > [ 2.581773] [<ffffffff813dddc9>] cpufreq_add_dev+0x222/0x2d7 > [ 2.581780] [<ffffffff812dc7da>] subsys_interface_register+0xa3/0xd7 > [ 2.581786] [<ffffffff8160e6c9>] ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x72/0x80 > [ 2.581792] [<ffffffff813dd1ae>] cpufreq_register_driver+0x9c/0x13b > [ 2.581799] [<ffffffff81d778ed>] ? cpufreq_gov_dbs_init+0x2c/0x2c > [ 2.581805] [<ffffffff81d77968>] acpi_cpufreq_init+0x7b/0x185 > [ 2.581811] [<ffffffff8100023a>] do_one_initcall+0x7a/0x130 > [ 2.581817] [<ffffffff81d4ddfb>] kernel_init_freeable+0x15e/0x1df > [ 2.581822] [<ffffffff81d4d6f2>] ? do_early_param+0x88/0x88 > [ 2.581828] [<ffffffff815f9568>] ? rest_init+0x12c/0x12c > [ 2.581833] [<ffffffff815f9571>] kernel_init+0x9/0xd1 > [ 2.581839] [<ffffffff81614bec>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0 > [ 2.581844] [<ffffffff815f9568>] ? rest_init+0x12c/0x12c > [ 2.581847] ---[ end trace a0eea8e0db3a3905 ]--- > [ 2.585909] ALSA device list: > [ 2.585913] #0: HDA Intel at 0xf6fdc000 irq 48 > [ 2.590781] Freeing unused kernel memory: 852k freed > -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one 2013-02-06 21:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-02-07 0:55 ` Valdis.Kletnieks 2013-02-07 1:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2013-02-07 7:41 ` Viresh Kumar 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Valdis.Kletnieks @ 2013-02-07 0:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: linux-kernel, cpufreq, linux-pm, Viresh Kumar [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 768 bytes --] On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 22:24:39 +0100, "Rafael J. Wysocki" said: > On Wednesday, February 06, 2013 12:44:35 PM Valdis Kletnieks wrote: > > Seen in dmesg. next-20130128 was OK. Haven't done a bisect, but can > > do so if the offender isn't obvious... > > I suppose this is 73bf0fc "cpufreq: Don't remove sysfs link for policy->cpu". > > Can you test the linux-pm.git/pm-cpufreq branch alone, please, and see > if that's this one (top-most commit)? Color me mystified. I can't find that commit by either number or the description: [/usr/src/linux-next] git log | egrep -i 'cpufreq.*remove.*link' [/usr/src/linux-next] git log | grep -i 73bf0fc [/usr/src/linux-next] Was that a very recent commit that may have gotten pushed too late for the next-20130206 merge? [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 865 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one 2013-02-07 0:55 ` Valdis.Kletnieks @ 2013-02-07 1:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2013-02-07 2:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-02-07 1:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Valdis.Kletnieks; +Cc: linux-kernel, cpufreq, linux-pm, Viresh Kumar On Wednesday, February 06, 2013 07:55:58 PM Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 22:24:39 +0100, "Rafael J. Wysocki" said: > > On Wednesday, February 06, 2013 12:44:35 PM Valdis Kletnieks wrote: > > > Seen in dmesg. next-20130128 was OK. Haven't done a bisect, but can > > > do so if the offender isn't obvious... > > > > I suppose this is 73bf0fc "cpufreq: Don't remove sysfs link for policy->cpu". > > > > Can you test the linux-pm.git/pm-cpufreq branch alone, please, and see > > if that's this one (top-most commit)? > > Color me mystified. I can't find that commit by either number or > the description: > > [/usr/src/linux-next] git log | egrep -i 'cpufreq.*remove.*link' > [/usr/src/linux-next] git log | grep -i 73bf0fc > [/usr/src/linux-next] > > Was that a very recent commit that may have gotten pushed too late > for the next-20130206 merge? Well, sorry, next-20130206 didn't include that commit. Can you please test the linux-pm.git/pm-cpufreq branch, then? Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one 2013-02-07 1:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-02-07 2:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-02-07 2:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Valdis.Kletnieks; +Cc: linux-kernel, cpufreq, linux-pm, Viresh Kumar On Thursday, February 07, 2013 02:12:17 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, February 06, 2013 07:55:58 PM Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > > On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 22:24:39 +0100, "Rafael J. Wysocki" said: > > > On Wednesday, February 06, 2013 12:44:35 PM Valdis Kletnieks wrote: > > > > Seen in dmesg. next-20130128 was OK. Haven't done a bisect, but can > > > > do so if the offender isn't obvious... > > > > > > I suppose this is 73bf0fc "cpufreq: Don't remove sysfs link for policy->cpu". > > > > > > Can you test the linux-pm.git/pm-cpufreq branch alone, please, and see > > > if that's this one (top-most commit)? > > > > Color me mystified. I can't find that commit by either number or > > the description: > > > > [/usr/src/linux-next] git log | egrep -i 'cpufreq.*remove.*link' > > [/usr/src/linux-next] git log | grep -i 73bf0fc > > [/usr/src/linux-next] > > > > Was that a very recent commit that may have gotten pushed too late > > for the next-20130206 merge? > > Well, sorry, next-20130206 didn't include that commit. > > Can you please test the linux-pm.git/pm-cpufreq branch, then? To be precise, I mean the pm-cpufreq branch of the tree at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git which is based on v3.8-rc6. Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one 2013-02-06 21:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2013-02-07 0:55 ` Valdis.Kletnieks @ 2013-02-07 7:41 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-02-07 19:18 ` Valdis.Kletnieks 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Viresh Kumar @ 2013-02-07 7:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: Valdis Kletnieks, linux-kernel, cpufreq, linux-pm On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote: > On Wednesday, February 06, 2013 12:44:35 PM Valdis Kletnieks wrote: >> Seen in dmesg. next-20130128 was OK. Haven't done a bisect, but can >> do so if the offender isn't obvious... > > I suppose this is 73bf0fc "cpufreq: Don't remove sysfs link for policy->cpu". Not really. :) Hi Valdis, First of all i want to confirm something about your system. I am sure it is a multi-policy system (or multi cluster system). i.e. there are more than one clock line for different cpus ? And so multiple struct policy exist simultaneously. Because this crash can only come on those. Anyway, i have tested and pushed a fix here: http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/vireshk/linux.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/for-valdis Please test it. For others, the patch is: commit 007dda326f1b1415846671d7fcfbd520f4f16151 Author: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Date: Thu Feb 7 12:51:27 2013 +0530 cpufreq: governors: Fix WARN_ON() for multi-policy platforms On multi-policy systems there is a single instance of governor for both the policies (if same governor is chosen for both policies). With the code update from following patches: 8eeed09 cpufreq: governors: Get rid of dbs_data->enable field b394058 cpufreq: governors: Reset tunables only for cpufreq_unregister_governor() We are creating/removing sysfs directory of governor for for every call to GOV_START and STOP. This would fail for multi-policy system as there is a per-policy call to START/STOP. This patch reuses the governor->initialized variable to detect total users of governor. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 6 ++++-- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++------------- 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c index ccc598a..3b941a1 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -1567,8 +1567,10 @@ static int __cpufreq_governor(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, policy->cpu, event); ret = policy->governor->governor(policy, event); - if (!policy->governor->initialized && (event == CPUFREQ_GOV_START)) - policy->governor->initialized = 1; + if (event == CPUFREQ_GOV_START) + policy->governor->initialized++; + else if (event == CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP) + policy->governor->initialized--; /* we keep one module reference alive for each CPU governed by this CPU */ diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c index e4a306c..5a76086 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c @@ -247,11 +247,13 @@ int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, dbs_data->gov_dbs_timer); } - rc = sysfs_create_group(cpufreq_global_kobject, - dbs_data->attr_group); - if (rc) { - mutex_unlock(&dbs_data->mutex); - return rc; + if (!policy->governor->initialized) { + rc = sysfs_create_group(cpufreq_global_kobject, + dbs_data->attr_group); + if (rc) { + mutex_unlock(&dbs_data->mutex); + return rc; + } } /* @@ -262,13 +264,15 @@ int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct dbs_data *dbs_data, cs_dbs_info->down_skip = 0; cs_dbs_info->enable = 1; cs_dbs_info->requested_freq = policy->cur; - cpufreq_register_notifier(cs_ops->notifier_block, - CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER); - if (!policy->governor->initialized) + if (!policy->governor->initialized) { + cpufreq_register_notifier(cs_ops->notifier_block, + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER); + dbs_data->min_sampling_rate = MIN_SAMPLING_RATE_RATIO * jiffies_to_usecs(10); + } } else { od_dbs_info->rate_mult = 1; od_dbs_info->sample_type = OD_NORMAL_SAMPLE; @@ -311,11 +315,13 @@ unlock: mutex_lock(&dbs_data->mutex); mutex_destroy(&cpu_cdbs->timer_mutex); - sysfs_remove_group(cpufreq_global_kobject, - dbs_data->attr_group); - if (dbs_data->governor == GOV_CONSERVATIVE) - cpufreq_unregister_notifier(cs_ops->notifier_block, - CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER); + if (policy->governor->initialized == 1) { + sysfs_remove_group(cpufreq_global_kobject, + dbs_data->attr_group); + if (dbs_data->governor == GOV_CONSERVATIVE) + cpufreq_unregister_notifier(cs_ops->notifier_block, + CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER); + } mutex_unlock(&dbs_data->mutex); break; ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one 2013-02-07 7:41 ` Viresh Kumar @ 2013-02-07 19:18 ` Valdis.Kletnieks 2013-02-08 2:45 ` Viresh Kumar 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Valdis.Kletnieks @ 2013-02-07 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Viresh Kumar; +Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-kernel, cpufreq, linux-pm [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 923 bytes --] On Thu, 07 Feb 2013 13:11:52 +0530, Viresh Kumar said: > First of all i want to confirm something about your system. I am sure it is a > multi-policy system (or multi cluster system). i.e. there are more than one > clock line for different cpus ? And so multiple struct policy exist > simultaneously. Hmm.. it's a bog-standard Dell Latitude E6500 laptop, with a single Core2 Duo P8700 CPU (one die, 2 cores, no HT). It's apparently able to clock both cores at different speeds (one core running busy at 2540mhz and the other idling at 800mhz), if that's what you mean by multiple clock lines. In any case, next-20130206 complained, and with this patch added I see nothing in dmesg and cpufreq is acting properly on both cores, so: Tested-By: Valdis Kletnieks <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu> (btw - I had to hand-apply your patch, as it showed up white-space damaged. Three lines wrapped, and tabs converted to spaces). [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 865 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one 2013-02-07 19:18 ` Valdis.Kletnieks @ 2013-02-08 2:45 ` Viresh Kumar 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Viresh Kumar @ 2013-02-08 2:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Valdis.Kletnieks; +Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-kernel, cpufreq, linux-pm On 8 February 2013 00:48, <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote: > On Thu, 07 Feb 2013 13:11:52 +0530, Viresh Kumar said: > >> First of all i want to confirm something about your system. I am sure it is a >> multi-policy system (or multi cluster system). i.e. there are more than one >> clock line for different cpus ? And so multiple struct policy exist >> simultaneously. > > Hmm.. it's a bog-standard Dell Latitude E6500 laptop, with a single > Core2 Duo P8700 CPU (one die, 2 cores, no HT). It's apparently able > to clock both cores at different speeds (one core running busy at 2540mhz > and the other idling at 800mhz), if that's what you mean by multiple > clock lines. Perfect!! So, when the cpus can manage different freqs, we have multiple struct policies for them per cpu. > In any case, next-20130206 complained, and with this patch added I see > nothing in dmesg and cpufreq is acting properly on both cores, so: > > Tested-By: Valdis Kletnieks <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu> Thanks. > (btw - I had to hand-apply your patch, as it showed up white-space > damaged. Three lines wrapped, and tabs converted to spaces). I know that and feeling bad for you :( I gave you this because of my mails issue :) http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/vireshk/linux.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/for-valdis ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-02-08 2:45 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-02-06 17:44 next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one Valdis Kletnieks 2013-02-06 21:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2013-02-07 0:55 ` Valdis.Kletnieks 2013-02-07 1:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2013-02-07 2:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2013-02-07 7:41 ` Viresh Kumar 2013-02-07 19:18 ` Valdis.Kletnieks 2013-02-08 2:45 ` Viresh Kumar
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).