On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 02:59:18PM +0100, Petr Pavlu wrote: > 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. Great, can you send a proper patch now with a proper commit log and Cc stable tag? Luis
