From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758986Ab3BGTTe (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2013 14:19:34 -0500 Received: from lennier.cc.vt.edu ([198.82.162.213]:39925 "EHLO lennier.cc.vt.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758806Ab3BGTTc (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2013 14:19:32 -0500 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.8.0 04/21/2012 with nmh-1.4-dev To: Viresh Kumar Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 07 Feb 2013 13:11:52 +0530." From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <9180.1360172675@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <17233164.aBDzy1OViI@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1360264736_3352P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 14:18:56 -0500 Message-ID: <3542.1360264736@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Mirapoint-Received-SPF: 198.82.161.152 auth3.smtp.vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu 2 pass X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=dagger.cc.vt.edu X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A020208.5113FE23.00B2,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2011-07-25 19:15:43, dmn=2011-05-27 18:58:46, mode=single engine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --==_Exmh_1360264736_3352P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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 (btw - I had to hand-apply your patch, as it showed up white-space damaged. Three lines wrapped, and tabs converted to spaces). --==_Exmh_1360264736_3352P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iQIVAwUBURP+IAdmEQWDXROgAQIi8w//VX8FYlHTm6Kmtcaitzpe5hMzF8C3tFuB bwjf2BsXsB1daY4JnQ+ADK/Jc1ZyNXoa832irBYGnnTFa4ewGqBby9w2PocE/OEw 5tA9e+o1gFi/S1DMOf9s5pbV6gEjf3vsSPjP7RGLIXjcj/fD0oHgvlOULWPv+JgX Grraqkzcjuv+CIMLnJzN0ATaKpTntRQnS1kZRqhybQhDb/OoFSA6+Bo5TUyASx9K Pep+VSSH7T93+OIv2Qw4VtW+CEtKBf/y6YQ8b2GZD4g1Jk0rRTyzTCT4UdxXy507 gWZZP5Ymg8SRcQ9oLxMh4kgLkf7VWF5gsi0lHavEYhoqLyZeK4pyc+QDBwqZ7D1S +4Z03qG923tX2U/FrAhBszpOiDT6otl2goNDdYxgcz4kIUFr3ZXoSs8xBhRC/oTv THGEjYX3dSNp6qNyGrhVldnkPFti4BoQVSKtcfipadzUUd7uQoaJZakqWhIkxDht P2ErL1O5TCnzCK8ecjYZObGNjVbb17D6jJq7UVlm/2bAgnu/TOj82aj4AURsp3IE cI4+953EKxxvMLdXO7PZVd/6Sge1VwV54rM/hCyYhEvvUjZY5u/nQ8c6+6YcemWU 3kjQoPrNz+9liDqhBfKO4Di9qC9nyYsI9+KlJhpXIiEJK3eJUunlCWk/SYMRGema R8Eqq8y5pU8= =e7jE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1360264736_3352P--