Hi, I remember this one ...
On 6/7/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 10:26:10AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > I wasn't actually able to reproduce the bug myself, but I guess it is > > pretty obvious that I shouldn't have called cpufreq_unregister_notifier > > with a spinlock held. I haven't been doing this long enough to know > > exactly which kernel this patch should be against, so let me know if > > this ins't good. Thanks! > > > > > > This patch (for the 2.6.21.3 kernel plus previously sent cpufreq > > notifier patch) fixes a bug caused by calling > > cpufreq_unregister_notifier (which can sleep) while holding a spinlock. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stuart Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hm, this doesn't apply to the 2.6.21.3 kernel. The cpufreq patches only live in -mm as of now ... > Can you send both patches merged together? > > And is the fix already in Linus's tree? Andrew seems to have already fixed this in the latest -mm (in this very thread, funnily enough, looks like you missed it as the subject change broke the threading :-) [ There is a subtle difference, however, in that Andrew's fix pushes the notifier unregistration /after/ the spin_unlock_irq(&ehci->lock) critical section whereas Stuart seems to be prefer doing it /before/ the corresponding spin_lock_irq() ... ] Satyam ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
