On 3 January 2014 17:25, Bjørn Mork <bjorn@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Correct. And users not running a lock debugging kernel will of course > not even see the warning. Okay.. >> - It only happens when cpufreq_add_dev() fails during hibernation while >> we enable non-boot CPUs again to save image to disk. So, isn't a problem >> for a system which doesn't have any issues with add_dev() failing on >> hibernation > > Wrong. This was my initial assumption but I later found out that the > issue is unrelated to hibernation failures. Sorry about the confusion. Hmm.. Can we have the latest warning logs you have? Earlier ones were related to hibernation.. >> - There is a contention of locks in the order they are taken. And the contention >> looks to be between, hotplug lock taken by cpu_online_cpus() and s_active >> lock for sysfs files. Don't know what's the role of previous write to >> sysfs files. >> As that should finish before hibernation starts and so all locks should be back >> in place. > > Yes, that seems logical. But I guess this is where it fails? It looked like that.. Though your new logs might indicate something else. -- 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
