Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH v4] pm_qos: make update_request non blocking

[Florian Mickler]

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 09:44:06 -0500
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> 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
> 

I absolutely defer to you in this question. But there is no
pm_qos_remove at the moment, as far as I see? Should I add one? When
and how would it be called?

Maybe I'm not understanding you right at the moment. 

Cheers,
Flo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/