Re: [Update][PATCH] cpufreq: Do not hold driver module references foradditional policy CPUs

[Viresh Kumar]

On 2 August 2013 02:23, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> To remove that inconsistency make cpufreq_add_policy_cpu() execute
> cpufreq_cpu_put() for the given policy before returning, which
> decrements the driver module refcount so that it will be 0 after
> __cpufreq_add_dev() returns.  Moreover, remove the cpufreq_cpu_get()
> call from cpufreq_add_dev_symlink(), since both the policy refcount
> and the driver module refcount are nonzero when it is called and they
> don't need to be bumped up by it.

Sorry for creating so many problems but my concerns with this patch
aren't yet over :(

Should we increment policy refcount or kobj refcount for every cpu it
is used on? I think yes, that's probably the right way of doing it.

And so we simply can't remove calls to cpufreq_cpu_get() from
cpufreq_add_dev_symlink() routine and also from
cpufreq_add_policy_cpu()..
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/