lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jul]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [LOCKDEP] cpufreq: possible circular locking dependency detected
On 07/16/2013 04:50 AM, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (07/15/13 18:49), Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> [..]
>> So here is the solution:
>>
>> On 3.11-rc1, apply these patches in the order mentioned below, and check
>> whether it fixes _all_ problems (both the warnings about IPI as well as the
>> lockdep splat).
>>
>> 1. Patch given in: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/11/661
>> (Just apply patch 1, not the entire patchset).
>>
>> 2. Apply the patch shown below, on top of the above patch:
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
> Hello Srivatsa,
> Thanks, I'll test a bit later -- in the morning. (laptop stopped resuming from
> suspend, probably radeon dmp).
>
>

Sure, thanks!

>
> Shouldn't we also kick the console lock?
>
>
> kernel/printk.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/printk.c b/kernel/printk.c
> index d37d45c..3e20233 100644
> --- a/kernel/printk.c
> +++ b/kernel/printk.c
> @@ -1926,8 +1926,11 @@ static int __cpuinit console_cpu_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
> {
> switch (action) {
> case CPU_ONLINE:
> + case CPU_ONLINE_FROZEN:
> case CPU_DEAD:
> + case CPU_DEAD_FROZEN:
> case CPU_DOWN_FAILED:
> + case CPU_DOWN_FAILED_FROZEN:
> case CPU_UP_CANCELED:
> console_lock();
> console_unlock();
>
>

No need. suspend_console() and resume_console() already handle it
properly in the suspend/resume case, from what I can see.

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-07-16 11:21    [W:0.120 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site