There is racing in __acpi_processor_start ==> acpi_processor_load_module ==> request_module_nowait/requested = 1 before first pr path to have requested set, second cpu would request again. that will cause acpi_cpufreq_early_init to be called in parallel, that will cause data curruption in acpi_cpufreq_early_init... and intermittent crash. So add mutex to protect it. Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Index: linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c +++ linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/processor_perflib.c @@ -235,6 +235,7 @@ void acpi_processor_ppc_exit(void) acpi_processor_ppc_status &= ~PPC_REGISTERED; } +static DEFINE_MUTEX(acpi_cpufreq_load_lock); /* * Do a quick check if the systems looks like it should use ACPI * cpufreq. We look at a _PCT method being available, but don't @@ -246,8 +247,12 @@ void acpi_processor_load_module(struct a acpi_status status = 0; struct acpi_buffer buffer = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL }; - if (!arch_has_acpi_pdc() || requested) + mutex_lock(&acpi_cpufreq_load_lock); + if (!arch_has_acpi_pdc() || requested) { + mutex_unlock(&acpi_cpufreq_load_lock); return; + } + status = acpi_evaluate_object(pr->handle, "_PCT", NULL, &buffer); if (!ACPI_FAILURE(status)) { printk(KERN_INFO PREFIX "Requesting acpi_cpufreq\n"); @@ -255,6 +260,7 @@ void acpi_processor_load_module(struct a requested = 1; } kfree(buffer.pointer); + mutex_unlock(&acpi_cpufreq_load_lock); } static int acpi_processor_get_performance_control(struct acpi_processor *pr) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html