From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" Subject: Re: stable 3-10-3: strange output of "lsmod | grep ^acpi_cpufreq" Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 13:38:42 +0530 Message-ID: <51F4D18A.7080605@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <51F40612.2050403@gmx.de> <4531734.kTFAPunoch@vostro.rjw.lan> <51F4D17F.1090107@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51F4D17F.1090107@gmx.de> Sender: cpufreq-owner@vger.kernel.org To: =?UTF-8?B?VG9yYWxmIEbDtnJzdGVy?= Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, Linux PM list , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Viresh Kumar List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On 07/28/2013 01:38 PM, Toralf F=C3=B6rster wrote: > On 07/28/2013 01:39 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Saturday, July 27, 2013 07:40:34 PM Toralf F=C3=B6rster wrote: >>> it gives at a ThinkPad T420: >>> >>> tfoerste@n22 ~/tmp $ lsmod | grep ^acpi_cpufreq >>> acpi_cpufreq 12902 2147483647 >> >> That is -1, which indicates some module refcount woes. >> >> I definitely can't see that with the mainline on my machines. >=20 > It might be a regression in -stable only, b/c in 3,10.2 I did not > observed it. >=20 > Srivatsa, >=20 > by any chance - could the revert of the cpufreq patches have somethin= g > to do with that ? > Hmmm? Those reverts didn't touch anything related to module refcounts.. So I don't think they have anything to do with this. Also, is the issue related to suspend/resume at all? (Sorry, I don't have your original email, so I'm not sure what the exact issue is). =20 Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat