Re: [PATCH 0/4] Allow cpufreq-dt to defer probe if OPP table is not ready

[Viresh Kumar]

On 17 December 2014 at 04:39, Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Note that I am not happy with OPP code: dev_pm_opp_init_cpufreq_table() is
> wrong in it's assumption that taking RCU lock will guarantee that number of
> OPPs will not change - we can remove OPP from list just fine, and then
> initialization will fail. I also think that we shoudl change API so users should
> get a reference to their OPP table and then pass opaque dev_opp pointer to
> accessor APIs instead of re-scanning the global list over and over and over.

Yeah, agree for both of them..
--
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/