On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 10:35:46AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 2 April 2013 01:41, Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c > > > +static struct cpufreq_driver __rcu *cpufreq_driver; > > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(cpufreq_driver_lock); > > You really need this lock? This is only used in cpufreq_register_driver > and unregister_driver... And it doesn't protect other routines at all. And > because we are using rcu stuff now, probably this lock is just not required. > The lock is unneeded if we expect register and unregister driver to not be called from muliple threads at once. I didn't make that assumption. > > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(cpufreq_data_lock); > > Only this one is required and it can be the rwlock which is already pushed > by rafael. -- 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
