On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 07:11:18PM +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > That's indeed a possible deadlock situation -- what's the > cpufreq_update_policy() call needed for in cpufreq_stat_cpu_callback anyway? I was hoping you could enlighten me :) I started picking through history with gitk, but my tk install uses fonts that make my eyes bleed. My kingdom for a 'git annotate'.. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- From: Roland Dreier <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- References:
- [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- From: "Michal Piotrowski" <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- From: Dave Jones <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- From: Dave Jones <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- From: Dave Jones <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- From: Dominik Brodowski <[email protected]>
- [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- Prev by Date: [PATCH] remove unnecessary return value of audit_avc_path
- Next by Date: Re: How to send a break? - dump from frozen 64bit linux
- Previous by thread: Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- Next by thread: Re: [patch 00/61] ANNOUNCE: lock validator -V1
- Index(es):