From: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@xxxxxxxxx> cpufreq_set_policy() has been changed to origin __cpufreq_set_policy() and policy->lock has been converted to rewrite lock by commit 5a01f2. So remove the comment. Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@xxxxxxxxx> --- This patch is based on patch "cpufreq: rename __cpufreq_set_policy() as cpufreq_set_policy()." http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137889464210638&w=2 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_userspace.c | 11 ----------- 1 file changed, 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_userspace.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_userspace.c index 0307809..4dbf1db 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_userspace.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_userspace.c @@ -38,18 +38,7 @@ static int cpufreq_set(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int freq) if (!per_cpu(cpu_is_managed, policy->cpu)) goto err; - /* - * We're safe from concurrent calls to ->target() here - * as we hold the userspace_mutex lock. If we were calling - * cpufreq_driver_target, a deadlock situation might occur: - * A: cpufreq_set (lock userspace_mutex) -> - * cpufreq_driver_target(lock policy->lock) - * B: cpufreq_set_policy(lock policy->lock) -> - * __cpufreq_governor -> - * cpufreq_governor_userspace (lock userspace_mutex) - */ ret = __cpufreq_driver_target(policy, freq, CPUFREQ_RELATION_L); - err: mutex_unlock(&userspace_mutex); return ret; -- 1.8.4.rc0.1.g8f6a3e5.dirty -- 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
