[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [linux-pm] [PATCH 2.6.25-rc1] cpufreq: fix cpufreq policy refcount imbalance
    On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Yi Yang wrote:

    > This patch adds kobject_put to balance refcount. I noticed Greg suggests
    > it will fix a power-off issue to remove kobject_get statement block, but i
    > think that isn't the best way because those code block has existed very long
    > and it is helpful because the successive statements are invoking relevant
    > data.

    Are you referring to this section of code (before the region affected
    by your patch)?

    if (!kobject_get(&data->kobj)) {
    spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags);
    return -EFAULT;

    Greg is correct that the kobject_get() here is useless and should be
    removed. kobject_get() never returns NULL unless its argument is NULL.
    Since &data->kobj can never be NULL, the "if" test will never fail.
    Hence there's no point in making the test at all.

    The fact that a section of code has existed for a long time doesn't
    mean that it is right. :-)

    Furthermore, there's no reason to do the kobject_get(). Holding 2
    references to a kobject is no better than holding just 1 reference.
    Assuming you know that the kobject is still registered, then you also
    know that there is already a reference to it. So you have no reason to
    take an additional reference.

    Alan Stern

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-02-15 16:55    [W:0.021 / U:0.024 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site