From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org,
davej@redhat.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, vatsa@in.ibm.com
Subject: Re: CPUFREQ-CPUHOTPLUG: Possible circular locking dependency
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 09:31:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061130083144.GC29609@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061129152404.GA7082@in.ibm.com>
* Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com> wrote:
> So do we
> - Rethink the strategy of per-subsystem hotcpu-locks ?
>
> OR
>
> - Think of a way to straighten out the super-convoluted cpufreq code ?
i'm still wondering what the conceptual source of this fundamental
locking complexity in cpufreq (and hotplug) is - it is not intuitive to
me at all. Could you try to explain that?
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-30 8:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-29 15:24 CPUFREQ-CPUHOTPLUG: Possible circular locking dependency Gautham R Shenoy
2006-11-29 21:05 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-30 4:28 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2006-11-30 6:35 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2006-11-30 8:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 8:52 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2006-12-01 1:43 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2006-12-01 8:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 8:31 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2006-11-30 10:24 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2006-11-30 11:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 11:19 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-30 11:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 12:44 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2006-11-30 14:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 19:40 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-30 20:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 11:43 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2006-11-30 11:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 12:19 ` Gautham R Shenoy
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-12-06 18:27 Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2006-12-07 7:06 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2006-12-07 12:50 Pallipadi, Venkatesh
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=20061130083144.GC29609@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox