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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 12:22:02 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com> To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] PM / OPP: Remove OF dependency on dev_pm_opp_of_{cpumask_,}remove_table On 28/04/16 12:12, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 28-04-16, 11:25, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> + * dev_pm_opp_remove_table() - Free OPP table static entries associated with >> + * the device > > Its not about static entries anymore, right? We will end up removing everything > we had in the table. > No, not yet. I have not made that change yet. I just asked that question in patch 2. I still remove individually but wanted to know if removing dynamic opp is any issue ? The OPP added using dev_pm_opp_add are marked dynamic and are not deleted by dev_pm_opp_{,cpumask_}remove_table. If it does, then scpi_free_opp_table can be assigned that instead of what I have in patch 2/2. > Can you please update comments also in the same patch ? > Sure once you agree and I make that change ;) -- Regards, Sudeep
Powered by blists - more mailing lists