[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0jebeWzUb-q-_xThRwZgUzaUfqS4YTGmsvbsOPrqFcYTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 17:42:03 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] thermal: core: Make thermal_zone_device_unregister()
return after freeing the zone
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 5:28 PM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezcano@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On 08/12/2023 20:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> >
> > Make thermal_zone_device_unregister() wait until all of the references
> > to the given thermal zone object have been dropped and free it before
> > returning.
> >
> > This guarantees that when thermal_zone_device_unregister() returns,
> > there is no leftover activity regarding the thermal zone in question
> > which is required by some of its callers (for instance, modular driver
> > code that wants to know when it is safe to let the module go away).
> >
> > Subsequently, this will allow some confusing device_is_registered()
> > checks to be dropped from the thermal sysfs and core code.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> > ---
>
> Definitively agree on the change
>
> Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Thanks!
> Would it make sense to use kref_get/put ?
Why and where?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists