[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 12:06:02 +0800
From: ethan zhao <ethan.zhao@...cle.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
CC: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
santosh shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>,
Linaro Kernel Mailman List <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH Resend] cpufreq: Set cpufreq_cpu_data to NULL before putting
kobject
On 2015/2/2 11:59, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 2 February 2015 at 09:26, ethan zhao <ethan.zhao@...cle.com> wrote:
>> How to prevent the policy to be freed between
>>
>> cpufreq_cpu_get() and cpufreq_cpu_put() ?
> kobject_get() increases the reference count of a policy and the policy
> will only be freed when this is zero. And it will only be zero once all
> cpufreq_cpu_get() are matched with corresponding cpufreq_cpu_put().
Is that an idea it supposed to be or fact ?
if (!cpufreq_suspended)
cpufreq_policy_free(policy);
static void cpufreq_policy_free(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
free_cpumask_var(policy->related_cpus);
free_cpumask_var(policy->cpus);
kfree(policy);
}
It seems you just think about it ideally in mind.
Thanks,
Ethan
>
>> You are maxing up the water with sand ?
> :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists