On 2015/2/2 12:09, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 2 February 2015 at 09:36, ethan zhao <ethan.z...@oracle.com> wrote:
Is that an idea it supposed to be or fact ?
if (!cpufreq_suspended)
cpufreq_policy_free(policy);
static void cpufreq_policy_free(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
free_cpumask_var(policy->related_cpus);
free_cpumask_var(policy->cpus);
kfree(policy);
}
It seems
you just think about it ideally in mind.
We am talking about the policy allocation and de-allocation. right ?
I showed you the cpufreq_policy_free(policy) doesn't check kobject
refcount as above.
Hmmm, you are still sleeping in the kobject, wake up and don't mix
water anymore.
Thanks,
Ethan
if (!cpufreq_suspended)
cpufreq_policy_put_kobj(policy);
static void cpufreq_policy_put_kobj(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
{
...
kobject_put(kobj);
/*
* We need to make sure that the underlying kobj is
* actually not referenced anymore by anybody before we
* proceed with unloading.
*/
pr_debug("waiting for dropping of refcount\n");
wait_for_completion(cmp);
}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
