On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 19:05, Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 06:12:15PM -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>> cpufreq table allocated by opp_init_cpufreq_table is better
>> freed by OPP layer itself. This allows future modifications to
>> the table handling to be transparent to the users.
> ...
>> +void opp_free_cpufreq_table(struct device *dev,
>> + struct cpufreq_frequency_table **table)
>> +{
>> + if (!table)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + /* Pretend as if I am an updater */
>> + mutex_lock(&dev_opp_list_lock);
>> + kfree(*table);
>> + *table = NULL;
>> + mutex_unlock(&dev_opp_list_lock);
>> +}
>
> Not clear what the mutex protects here. Currently it protects only
> device opp list modifications. opp_init_cpufreq_table holds the lock only
> while looking up and walking the device opp list; the cpufreq table it
> creates is not complete by the time the lock is dropped.
hmm.. right.. mutex protection does'nt really make sense here..
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
