linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] Allow cpufreq-dt to defer probe if OPP table is not ready

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 17 Dec 2014 10:12:27 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...omium.org>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
	Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Allow cpufreq-dt to defer probe if OPP table is not ready

On 17 December 2014 at 04:39, Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...omium.org> wrote:
> Note that I am not happy with OPP code: dev_pm_opp_init_cpufreq_table() is
> wrong in it's assumption that taking RCU lock will guarantee that number of
> OPPs will not change - we can remove OPP from list just fine, and then
> initialization will fail. I also think that we shoudl change API so users should
> get a reference to their OPP table and then pass opaque dev_opp pointer to
> accessor APIs instead of re-scanning the global list over and over and over.

Yeah, agree for both of them..
--
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/