On Saturday, August 03, 2013 06:57:11 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 3 August 2013 17:38, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Saturday, August 03, 2013 05:19:26 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > >> Governor's owner refcount usage was broken. We should increment refcount only > >> when CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_INIT event has come and should decrement only if > >> CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT has come. > >> > >> Lets fix it. > > > > OK, and what happens if we don't fix it? > > What about this changelog: > > Subject: [PATCH 08/10] cpufreq: Fix broken usage of governor->owner's > refcount > > Governor's owner refcount usage was broken. We should increment refcount only > when CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_INIT event has come and should decrement only if > CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_EXIT has come. > > Currently there can be situations where governor is in use but we have allowed > it to be unloaded. And that may cause in undefined behavior. "it to be unloaded which may result in undefined behavior." > > Lets fix it. > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> Apart from the above looks good. Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- 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
