On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:54 PM, <dirk.brandewie@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@xxxxxxxxx> > > 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@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > 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 ? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
