https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=77201 --- Comment #40 from registosites@xxxxxxxxxxx --- > Hi, > > Thanks for your efforts !! > > We couldn't get the complete picture as there are just too many prints > wanting to fit on screen :) > > Can you try this to get the right set of prints for us, that way we might be > able to focus in the right direction: > > - Remove all pr_debug() lines from powernow-k8 driver > - And apply attached patch for cpufreq core, only reducing number of print > messages. (Rebased over 3.15) I have deleted all pr_debug() lines and recompiled with all the patches, modifications and config options from previous posts. > > And then give us another screenshot.. The new screenshot is attached. After bringing the cpu online I got back to a prompt but the machine hangs. > > Also some queries about your current logs: > - I hope this was the last message you saw on screen and it just became > unresponsive? > > freq_table: target index is 0, freq is:2200000 kHz > That was the last output before the machine became unresponsive. > and the expected ones after this are: > > powernow_k8: targ: cpu 0, 2200000 kHz, min 800000, max 2200000 > powernow_k8: targ: curr fid 0x8, vid 0x15 > powernow_k8: cpu 0 transition to index 0 > powernow_k8: table matched fid 0xe, giving vid 0x12 > powernow_k8: cpu 0, changing to fid 0xe, vid 0x12 > > So, it looks like the CPU did came back and something happened while changing > freq to max. > > Somehow this problem is related to something special being done in your > driver. We don't see this problem otherwise for other platforms. > > One thing i could figure out is scheduling a *work* for changing frequencies > but I am not sure if the problem is related to that.. > > I tried to have a look at what changed between 3.13.8 and 3.14, and couldn't > figure out anything special that might end up in this issue :( > > > If you couldn't get anything conclusive with above tests then there might be > some chances that it *isn't* related to cpufreq and some other changes in > kernel are responsible. The best we can try is: get only cpufreq back to the > old state, i.e. 3.13.8, by reverting commits and try again.. > > few reverts were required for this and to simplify your work I have created > a branch with all reverts required. > > git://git.linaro.org/people/viresh.kumar/mylinux.git powernow-k8-debugging > > NOTE: We can still see some diff this way: > git diff v3.13.8..powernow-k8-debugging -- drivers/cpufreq/ -- > include/linux/cpufreq.h > > But there shouldn't be any *functional* change for > cpufreq.c/governors/freq-table.c/powernow-k8 drivers and all cpufreq files > do compile.. (haven't tried compiling powernow-k8).. > > Let me know if this solves your problem or make it worst :) I didn't manage to compile this one, it fails with: CC drivers/cpuidle/sysfs.o CC lib/dynamic_debug.o CC [M] drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.o CC drivers/cpuidle/governors/ladder.o drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c: In function ‘store_boost’: drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c:160:26: error: ‘struct cpufreq_driver’ has no member named ‘boost_supported’ if (!acpi_cpufreq_driver.boost_supported) ^ drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c: In function ‘show_cpb’: drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c:180:49: error: ‘struct cpufreq_driver’ has no member named ‘boost_enabled’ return sprintf(buf, "%u\n", acpi_cpufreq_driver.boost_enabled); ^ drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c: In function ‘boost_notify’: drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c:540:37: error: ‘struct cpufreq_driver’ has no member named ‘boost_enabled’ boost_set_msrs(acpi_cpufreq_driver.boost_enabled, cpumask); ^ drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c: At top level: drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c:897:2: error: unknown field ‘set_boost’ specified in initializer .set_boost = _store_boost, ^ drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c:897:2: warning: excess elements in struct initializer drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c:897:2: warning: (near initialization for ‘acpi_cpufreq_driver’) drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c: In function ‘acpi_cpufreq_boost_init’: drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c:908:22: error: ‘struct cpufreq_driver’ has no member named ‘boost_supported’ acpi_cpufreq_driver.boost_supported = true; ^ drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c:909:22: error: ‘struct cpufreq_driver’ has no member named ‘boost_enabled’ acpi_cpufreq_driver.boost_enabled = boost_state(0); ^ drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c:913:37: error: ‘struct cpufreq_driver’ has no member named ‘boost_enabled’ boost_set_msrs(acpi_cpufreq_driver.boost_enabled, ^ drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c: In function ‘show_cpb’: drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c:181:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type] } ^ scripts/Makefile.build:314: recipe for target 'drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.o' failed make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.o] Error 1 scripts/Makefile.build:455: recipe for target 'drivers/cpufreq' failed make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2 make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... CC drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.o CC lib/nlattr.o CC net/core/rtnetlink.o LD drivers/cpuidle/governors/built-in.o LD drivers/cpuidle/built-in.o Makefile:841: recipe for target 'drivers' failed make: *** [drivers] Error 2 make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... CC net/core/utils.o CC lib/average.o CC lib/cpu_rmap.o CC lib/dynamic_queue_limits.o -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.-- 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
