Re: [PATCH Resend] cpufreq: Set cpufreq_cpu_data to NULL before putting kobject

[Viresh Kumar]

On 2 February 2015 at 09:08, ethan zhao <ethan.zhao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> We take cpufreq_driver_lock() here, and so this will
>> block thread B.
>
>  No, there is no  cpufreq_driver_lock acquired between
>
>  cpufreq_cpu_get()  and cpufreq_cpu_put()

I am not saying that the lock is taken between them. But within
cpufreq_cpu_get() to make sure policy doesn't get freed while we
are doing kobject_get().

>>>             beginning the deference of policy        Thread B:
>>>             ... ... __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish()
>>> cpufreq_policy_free(policy);
>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps move policy->rwsem out side the policy structure is a way to
>>> avoid
>>> it completely.
>>> and you could stopping the PPC thread stepping forward as my patch as
>>> temporary workaround.
>>
>> I couldn't understand your problem completely. Apart from giving a
>> detailed
>> look of what's going on both threads, always specify where the BUG
>> actually
>> is..
>
> The problem is you are using a rwsem inside policy structure to protect its
> assessment, that is bad design.

What is the current bug you are facing right now, I haven't understood it well.
Also a lock within the structure isn't new. Its all over the kernel. I
don't understand
why you say its a bad design.

--
viresh
--
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/