[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56B26154.9010000@codeaurora.org>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 12:21:40 -0800
From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
CC: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>, juri.lelli@....com,
linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, mturquette@...libre.com,
steve.muckle@...aro.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
morten.rasmussen@....com, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 5/7] cpufreq: Merge cpufreq_offline_prepare/finish
routines
On 02/03/2016 06:02 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> The offline routine was separated into two halves earlier by
> 'commit 1aee40ac9c86 ("cpufreq: Invoke __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish()
> after releasing cpu_hotplug.lock");.
>
> And the reasons cited were, race issues between accessing policy's sysfs
> files and policy kobject's cleanup.
>
> That race isn't valid anymore, as we don't remove the policy & its
> kobject completely on hotplugs, but do that from ->remove() callback of
> subsys framework.
>
> These two routines can be merged back now.
>
> This is a preparatory step for the next patch, that will enforce
> policy->rwsem lock around __cpufreq_governor() routines STOP/EXIT
> sequence.
Is this stale text? Seems like this is now done in the *previous* patch?
-Saravana
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists