Hi Thomas,
On 03/23/2014 06:56 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Sunday, March 23, 2014 03:09:32 PM Thomas Gleixner wrote:
We are about to free the data structure. Make sure no timer callback
is running. I might be paranoid, but the ->exit callback can be
invoked from so many places, that it is not entirely clear whether
del_timer is always called on the cpu on which it is enqueued.
While looking through the call sites I noticed, that
cpufreq_init_policy() can fail and invoke cpufreq_driver->exit() but
it does not return the failure and the callsite happily proceeds.
The call to del_timer() has been moved to a new callback in material
in Rafaels pull request for v3.15.
I will send a patch adding this change to the v3.15 material.
--Dirk
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: cpufreq <cpufreq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: pm <linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Dirk?
---
drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index: tip/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
===================================================================
--- tip.orig/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
+++ tip/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
@@ -777,7 +777,7 @@ static int intel_pstate_cpu_exit(struct
{
int cpu = policy->cpu;
- del_timer(&all_cpu_data[cpu]->timer);
+ del_timer_sync(&all_cpu_data[cpu]->timer);
kfree(all_cpu_data[cpu]);
all_cpu_data[cpu] = NULL;
return 0;
--
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
