On 26 January 2016 at 14:13, Geert Uytterhoeven [off-list ref] wrote:

Hi Rafael,

On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 2:20 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wednesday, January 20, 2016 12:07:39 PM Ulf Hansson wrote:

quoted

We must preserve the same order of how we acquire and release the lock for
genpd, as otherwise we may encounter deadlocks.

The power on phase of a genpd starts by acquiring its lock. Then it walks
the hierarchy of its parent domains to be able to power on these first, as
per design of genpd.

From a locking perspective this means the locks of the parents becomes
acquired after the lock of the subdomain.

Let's fix pm_genpd_add|remove_subdomain() to maintain the same order of
acquiring/releasing the genpd lock as being applied in the power on/off
sequence.

Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <redacted>

Applied, thanks!

It looks like you accidentally applied v1, introducing the lockdep warnings
fixed in v2?

Correct, it's the v1.

Rafael, if you can't replace the patch I can send an incremental fix
on top. Just tell me what way you prefer.

Kind regards
Uffe