On 08-09-15, 02:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > static inline unsigned int get_freq_target(struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners,
> > struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> > {
> > @@ -119,12 +132,14 @@ static int dbs_cpufreq_notifier(struct notifier_block
> > *nb, unsigned long val,
> > struct cpufreq_freqs *freq = data;
> > struct cs_cpu_dbs_info_s *dbs_info =
> > &per_cpu(cs_cpu_dbs_info, freq->cpu);
> > - struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(freq->cpu);
> >
> > - if (!dbs_info->enable)
> > + if (!policy)
> > return 0;
> >
> > - policy = dbs_info->cdbs.shared->policy;
>
> So here we could get to the policy directly. After the change we have to:
>
> - acquire cpufreq_rwsem
> - acquire cpufreq_driver_lock
> - go the kobject_get on policy->kobj
Hmm, actually we can do cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() here as this is getting
called from notifier and policy isn't going to get freed for sure.
And then it wouldn't be that bad.
> and then finally drop the reference to the kobject when we're done.
>
> So may I ask where exactly is the improvement?
Agree. Let me resend it quickly.
> > + /* policy isn't governed by conservative governor */
> > + if (policy->governor != &cpufreq_gov_conservative)
> > + goto policy_put;
> >
> > /*
> > * we only care if our internally tracked freq moves outside the 'valid'
>
> Thanks,
> Rafael
--
viresh
--
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/
