On 2 August 2013 02:23, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > To remove that inconsistency make cpufreq_add_policy_cpu() execute > cpufreq_cpu_put() for the given policy before returning, which > decrements the driver module refcount so that it will be 0 after > __cpufreq_add_dev() returns. Moreover, remove the cpufreq_cpu_get() > call from cpufreq_add_dev_symlink(), since both the policy refcount > and the driver module refcount are nonzero when it is called and they > don't need to be bumped up by it. Sorry for creating so many problems but my concerns with this patch aren't yet over :( Should we increment policy refcount or kobj refcount for every cpu it is used on? I think yes, that's probably the right way of doing it. And so we simply can't remove calls to cpufreq_cpu_get() from cpufreq_add_dev_symlink() routine and also from cpufreq_add_policy_cpu().. -- 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
