Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 05 Feb 2013 18:08:46 -0800 | From | Dirk Brandewie <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5/7] cpufreq: balance out cpufreq_cpu_{get,put} for scaling drivers using setpolicy |
| |
On 02/05/2013 05:58 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:54 PM, <dirk.brandewie@gmail.com> wrote: >> From: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@gmail.com> >> >> There is an additional reference added to the driver in >> cpufreq_add_dev() that is removed in__cpufreq_governor() if the >> driver implements target(). Remove the last reference when the >> driver implements setpolicy() >> >> Signed-off-by: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.j.brandewie@intel.com> >> --- >> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 3 +++ >> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c >> index 622e282..d17477b 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c >> @@ -1049,6 +1049,9 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev(struct device *dev, struct subsys_interface *sif >> if (cpufreq_driver->target) >> __cpufreq_governor(data, CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP); >> >> + if (cpufreq_driver->setpolicy) >> + cpufreq_cpu_put(data); > > I don't understand this patch at all.. I grepped both cpufreq_cpu_get() & put() > in bleeding-edge and found everything to be correct. > > Can you please point me to the exact line numbers ? >
Line 878 in cpufreq_add_dev()
--Dirk
| |