Re: [PATCH V4 3/7] cpufreq: Remove cpufreq_governor_lock

2016-02-11 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 4:46 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > We used to drop policy->rwsem just before calling __cpufreq_governor() > in some cases earlier and so it was possible that __cpufreq_governor() > runs concurrently via separate threads. > > In order to guarantee valid state transitions for gove

[PATCH V4 3/7] cpufreq: Remove cpufreq_governor_lock

2016-02-08 Thread Viresh Kumar
We used to drop policy->rwsem just before calling __cpufreq_governor() in some cases earlier and so it was possible that __cpufreq_governor() runs concurrently via separate threads. In order to guarantee valid state transitions for governors, 'governor_enabled' was required to be protected using s