Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpufreq: governor: Fix potential races

[Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>]

On 04-06-15, 10:44, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
> On 06/03/2015 03:57 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > Preeti recently highlighted [1] some issues in cpufreq core locking with
> > respect to governors. I wanted to solve them after we have simplified
> > the hotplug paths in cpufreq core with my latest patches, but now that
> > she has poked me, I have done some work in that area.
> > 
> > I am trying to solve only a part of the bigger problem (in a way that I
> > feel is the right way ahead). The first patches restructures code to
> > make it more readable and the last patch does all the major changes. The
> > logs in that one should be good enough to explain why and what I am
> > doing.
> > 
> > The first two shouldn't bring any functional change and so can be
> > applied early if you are confident about them.
> > 
> > @Preeti: I would like you to test these patches. These should get rid of
> > the crashes you were facing but may generate a WARN() from line 447 of
> > cpufreq_governor.c, if the sequence is wrong. That has to be fixed
> > separately.
> > 
> > Line 447: WARN_ON(!dbs_data && (event != CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_INIT))

Hi Preeti,

Thanks for giving your RBY tags for all the patches, would you also
like to give Tested-by's if you have done any testing on these.

That is just to confirm it hasn't broken things any further and that
we haven't seen any crashes in races between
INIT/EXIT/START/STOP/LIMITS.

-- 
viresh