On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 16:33 +0200, Florian Mickler wrote: > On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:25:52 -0500 > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Actually, pm_qos_remove now needs a flush_scheduled work since you don't > > want to return until the list is clear (since the next action may be to > > free the object). > > The work-items are allocated in the pm_qos objects (which get never > freed), so we should be fine there. That's not a safe assumption. Once we get into drivers, timers and cpu ilde states, I can see these things being in modules. Regardless, it's bad programming practise to be using something after the final remove is called, it certainly violates the principle of least surprise and would usually eventually cause problems. James _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
