From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: kerneloops.org report for the week of June 14 2009 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:58:43 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <20090614173331.18f01123@infradead.org> <20090623115510.GC9497@elte.hu> <200906231856.24959.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:37413 "EHLO www.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760024AbZFWRAv (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:00:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200906231856.24959.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Arjan van de Ven , LKML , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Venki Pallipadi , Len Brown , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , ACPI Devel Maling List On Tue, 23 Jun 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > The long term solution for the issue at hand is to clean up the suspend-resume > support in cpufreq so that it doesn't do stupid things like calling > smp_call_function_single() with interrupts disabled, but that requires someone > (I can do it, but I need to dig through the cpufreq code for this purpose) to > figure out how to fix it. > > I'm not quite sure if there's an acceptable short term solution, though. > > In principle we can do > > local_irq_save() > ... > local_irq_restore() > > around each sysdevs ->susend() and ->resume() in addition to checking the > status of interrupts. Would that work? Well not really, if the function enables interrupts you run into the same issue (interrupt service routine calls ktime_get()) again. Thanks, tglx