Re: [PATCH linux-next v8] cpufreq: convert the cpufreq_driver to use the rcu
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Sun Apr 28 2013 - 18:14:24 EST
On Thursday, April 04, 2013 09:57:19 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 4 April 2013 20:23, Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > We eventually would like to remove the rwlock cpufreq_driver_lock or convert
> > it back to a spinlock and protect the read sections with RCU. The first step in
> > that is moving the cpufreq_driver to use the rcu.
> > I don't see an easy wasy to protect the cpufreq_cpu_data structure with the
> > RCU, so I am leaving it with the rwlock for now since under certain configs
> > __cpufreq_cpu_get is hot spot with 256+ cores.
> > v5: Go a different way and split up the lock and use the rcu
> > v6: use bools instead of checking function pointers
> > covert the cpufreq_data_lock to a rwlock
> > v7: Rebase to use the already accepted half
> > v8: Correct have_governor_per_policy
> > Reviewed location of rcu_read_(un)lock in several spots
> Sorry for long delay or too many versions of this patch :)
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
Unfortunately, I had to revert this one, because it is obviously buggy. Why?
Because it adds rcu_read_lock()/rcu_read_unlock() around sysfs_create_file()
which may sleep due to a GFP_KERNEL memory allocation. Sorry for failing to
notice that earlier.
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
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/