[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170828002551epcms1p20fed7149e2e01f2d5517e926a1794864@epcms1p2>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 00:25:51 +0000
From: MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>
To: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>
CC: "rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
"chanwoo@...nel.org" <chanwoo@...nel.org>,
Inki Dae <inki.dae@...sung.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 02/12] PM / devfreq: Fix locking range for making the
frequency table
> Even if the freq_table is included in the struct devfreq,
> the commit 0ec09ac2cebe ("PM / devfreq: Set the freq_table
> of devfreq device") set the frequency table outside the mutex locking.
>
> So, this patch initializes the frequency table within the mutex locking.
>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Fixes: 0ec09ac2cebe ("PM / devfreq: Set the freq_table of devfreq device")
> Signed-off-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>
Is this because you do not have locks inside
devfreq_set_freq_table() anymore?
> ---
> drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c | 5 +----
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c b/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c
> index a1c4ee818614..3c5ccb96e165 100644
> --- a/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/devfreq.c
> @@ -553,11 +553,8 @@ struct devfreq *devfreq_add_device(struct device *dev,
> devfreq->data = data;
> devfreq->nb.notifier_call = devfreq_notifier_call;
>
> - if (!devfreq->profile->max_state && !devfreq->profile->freq_table) {
> - mutex_unlock(&devfreq->lock);
> + if (!devfreq->profile->max_state && !devfreq->profile->freq_table)
> devfreq_set_freq_table(devfreq);
> - mutex_lock(&devfreq->lock);
> - }
>
> dev_set_name(&devfreq->dev, "devfreq%d",
> atomic_inc_return(&devfreq_no));
Powered by blists - more mailing lists