From: Sudeep Holla <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <email@example.com> Cc: Linux PM <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Linux ACPI <email@example.com>, LKML <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Viresh Kumar <email@example.com>, Sudeep Holla <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Dmitry Osipenko <email@example.com> Subject: Re: [RFT][PATCH 0/3] cpufreq / PM: QoS: Introduce frequency QoS and use it in cpufreq Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 15:23:43 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20191016142343.GB5330@bogus> (raw) In-Reply-To: <2811202.iOFZ6YHztY@kreacher> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:37:58PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Hi All, > > The motivation for this series is to address the problem discussed here: > > https://firstname.lastname@example.org/T/#md2d89e95906b8c91c15f582146173dce2e86e99f > > and also reported here: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20191015155735.GA29105@bogus/ > > Plus, generally speaking, using the policy CPU as a proxy for the policy > with respect to PM QoS does not feel particularly straightforward to me > and adds extra complexity. > > Anyway, the first patch adds frequency QoS that is based on "raw" PM QoS (kind > of in analogy with device PM QoS) and is just about min and max frequency > requests (no direct relationship to devices). > > The second patch switches over cpufreq and its users to the new frequency QoS. > [The Fixes: tag has been tentatively added to it.] > > The third one removes frequency request types from device PM QoS. > > Unfortunately, the patches are rather big, but also they are quite > straightforward. > > I didn't have the time to test this series, so giving it a go would be much > appreciated. Thanks for the spinning these patches so quickly. I did give it a spin, but unfortunately it doesn't fix the bug I reported. So I looked at my bug report in detail and looks like the cpufreq_driver variable is set to NULL at that point and it fails to dereference it while trying to execute: ret = cpufreq_driver->verify(new_policy); (Hint verify is at offset 0x1c/28) So I suspect some race as this platform with bL switcher tries to unregister and re-register the cpufreq driver during the boot. I need to spend more time on this as reverting the initial PM QoS patch to cpufreq.c makes the issue disappear. -- Regards, Sudeep
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-16 14:23 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-10-16 10:37 Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-10-16 10:41 ` [RFT][PATCH 1/3] PM: QoS: Introduce frequency QoS Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-10-17 9:41 ` Viresh Kumar 2019-10-17 14:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-10-18 5:41 ` Viresh Kumar 2019-10-24 19:01 ` Leonard Crestez 2019-10-24 19:34 ` Leonard Crestez 2019-11-17 7:34 ` Doug Smythies 2019-11-17 16:13 ` Doug Smythies 2019-11-19 14:35 ` Doug Smythies 2019-11-19 19:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-11-19 22:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-11-20 6:55 ` Doug Smythies 2019-11-20 9:08 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-10-16 10:47 ` [RFT][PATCH 2/3] cpufreq: Use per-policy " Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-10-16 18:01 ` Dmitry Osipenko 2019-10-17 21:29 ` Dmitry Osipenko 2019-10-18 9:29 ` Viresh Kumar 2019-10-18 15:31 ` Dmitry Osipenko 2019-10-16 10:47 ` [RFT][PATCH 3/3] PM: QoS: Drop frequency QoS types from device PM QoS Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-10-16 14:23 ` Sudeep Holla [this message] 2019-10-17 9:57 ` [RFT][PATCH 0/3] cpufreq / PM: QoS: Introduce frequency QoS and use it in cpufreq Viresh Kumar 2019-10-17 9:59 ` Sudeep Holla 2019-10-17 16:34 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-10-17 16:42 ` Sudeep Holla 2019-10-18 5:44 ` Viresh Kumar 2019-10-18 8:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-10-18 8:27 ` Viresh Kumar 2019-10-18 8:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-10-18 9:24 ` Viresh Kumar 2019-10-18 9:26 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2019-10-18 9:28 ` Viresh Kumar 2019-10-17 17:14 ` Sudeep Holla 2019-10-17 9:46 ` Viresh Kumar
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20191016142343.GB5330@bogus \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: [RFT][PATCH 0/3] cpufreq / PM: QoS: Introduce frequency QoS and use it in cpufreq' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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).