Subject: Re: Crashes in arm qemu emulations due to 'cpufreq: governor: Replace timers with utilization ...'

From: Viresh Kumar <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 06:43:35 +0530

On 15-02-16, 19:41, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Guenter Roeck <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > [    1.340000] [<c0958e78>] (__cpufreq_driver_target) from [<c095ca58>] (dbs_check_cpu+0x1ac/0x1e8)
> > [    1.340000] [<c095ca58>] (dbs_check_cpu) from [<c095cd04>] (cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x1fc/0x608)
> > [    1.340000] [<c095cd04>] (cpufreq_governor_dbs) from [<c0959c5c>] (__cpufreq_governor+0x1a8/0x204)
> > [    1.340000] [<c0959c5c>] (__cpufreq_governor) from [<c095a2dc>] (cpufreq_init_policy+0x60/0x8c)
> > [    1.340000] [<c095a2dc>] (cpufreq_init_policy) from [<c095a5f0>] (cpufreq_online+0x2e8/0x708)
> > [    1.340000] [<c095a5f0>] (cpufreq_online) from [<c075674c>] (subsys_interface_register+0x80/0xc4)
> > [    1.340000] [<c075674c>] (subsys_interface_register) from [<c0959764>] (cpufreq_register_driver+0x144/0x1a0)
> 
> This is the registration of the cpufreq driver (cpufreq-dt in this case).
> 
> It does cpufreq_online()->cpufreq_init_policy()->__cpufreq_governor()->cpufreq_governor_dbs()->dbs_check_cpu().
> 
> The only way that can happen is when cpufreq_set_policy() finds that
> the "old" and the "new" policies use the same governor, so it goes and
> calls __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS), but I'm not sure
> how this is possible during the initialization ATM.
> 
> Viresh, any ideas?

You misread probably.

During init, policy->gov is NULL and new_policy->gov is set to the
default one, probably ondemand/conservative. And in that case, we do:
- INIT
- START
- LIMITS

So above sequence is guaranteed to happen rather.

-- 
viresh