On 11/21/22 20:03, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > To be clear I don't care about the patch mentioned in the above URL, I care > about this: > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/d0bc50e3-0e42-311b-20ed-7538bb918c5b@xxxxxxxx > [...] > > Petr, you had mentioned in the commit log for your second patch in this > thread that your change fixes a regression. What I asked for was for a > patch that fixes that regression alone first so we can send to stable. > So what issue is that alternative patch fixing? This alternative patch fixes the discussed regression with failing inserts of acpi_cpufreq and pcc_cpufreq delaying boot. As mentioned, the situation can in the worst case prevent udev from loading drivers for other devices and might cause timeouts of services waiting on them and subsequently a failed boot. The patch attempts a different solution for the problem that 6e6de3dee51a was trying to solve. Rather than waiting for the unloading to complete, it returns a different error code (-EBUSY) for modules in the GOING state. This should avoid the error situation that was described in 6e6de3dee51a (user space attempting to load a dependent module because the -EEXIST error code would suggest to user space that the first module had been loaded successfully), while avoiding the delay issue too. Petr
