On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 7:00 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki
> >
> > After commit bcdde7e221a8 (sysfs: make __sysfs_remove_dir() recursive)
> > I'm seeing traces analogous to the one below in Thunderbolt testin
On Monday, November 25, 2013 02:59:44 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki
> >
> > After commit bcdde7e221a8 (sysfs: make __sysfs_remove_dir() recursive)
> > I'm seeing traces analogous to the one below in Thunderbolt test
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki
>
> After commit bcdde7e221a8 (sysfs: make __sysfs_remove_dir() recursive)
> I'm seeing traces analogous to the one below in Thunderbolt testing:
>
> WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 76 at /scratch/rafael/work/linux-pm/fs/sys
On Monday, November 25, 2013 11:45:50 AM Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 3:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > Well, is_removed is only used by pci_destroy_dev() in your patch, right?
> >
> > That means its only role is to protect the device from being destroyed
> > twice (or more
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 3:23 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>> or you can check if
>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/292622/
>> [1/6] PCI: move back pci_proc_attach_devices calling
>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/292623/
>> [2/6] PCI: move resources and bus_list releasing to pci_relea
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 3:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> Well, is_removed is only used by pci_destroy_dev() in your patch, right?
>
> That means its only role is to protect the device from being destroyed
> twice (or more times) in a row, but that surely would be a bug? I don't
> see how tha
On Monday, November 25, 2013 11:47:07 AM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 01:17:52AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki
> >
> > After commit bcdde7e221a8 (sysfs: make __sysfs_remove_dir() recursive)
> > I'm seeing traces analogous to the one below in Thund
On Sunday, November 24, 2013 08:58:12 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:54 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki
> > wrote:
> >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki
> >>
> >> After commit bcdde7e221a8 (sysfs: make __sysfs_remove_dir() recursive)
> >> I'
On Sunday, November 24, 2013 08:54:12 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki
> >
> > After commit bcdde7e221a8 (sysfs: make __sysfs_remove_dir() recursive)
> > I'm seeing traces analogous to the one below in Thunderbolt testing
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:54 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki
>>
>> After commit bcdde7e221a8 (sysfs: make __sysfs_remove_dir() recursive)
>> I'm seeing traces analogous to the one below in Thunderbolt testing:
>>
>> WAR
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki
>
> After commit bcdde7e221a8 (sysfs: make __sysfs_remove_dir() recursive)
> I'm seeing traces analogous to the one below in Thunderbolt testing:
>
> WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 76 at /scratch/rafael/work/linux-pm/fs/sys
11 matches
Mail list logo