[PATCH V3 1/5] cpufreq: ondemand: Drop unnecessary locks from update_sampling_rate()

From: Viresh Kumar
Date: Tue Oct 13 2015 - 04:09:29 EST


'timer_mutex' is required to sync work-handlers of policy->cpus.
update_sampling_rate() is just canceling the works and queuing them
again. This isn't protecting anything at all in update_sampling_rate()
and is not gonna be of any use.

Even if a work-handler is already running for a CPU,
cancel_delayed_work_sync() will wait for it to finish.

Drop these unnecessary locks.

Reviewed-by: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c | 10 +---------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
index 1fa9088c84a8..03ac6ce54042 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
@@ -267,27 +267,19 @@ static void update_sampling_rate(struct dbs_data *dbs_data,
dbs_info = &per_cpu(od_cpu_dbs_info, cpu);
cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);

- mutex_lock(&dbs_info->cdbs.shared->timer_mutex);
-
- if (!delayed_work_pending(&dbs_info->cdbs.dwork)) {
- mutex_unlock(&dbs_info->cdbs.shared->timer_mutex);
+ if (!delayed_work_pending(&dbs_info->cdbs.dwork))
continue;
- }

next_sampling = jiffies + usecs_to_jiffies(new_rate);
appointed_at = dbs_info->cdbs.dwork.timer.expires;

if (time_before(next_sampling, appointed_at)) {
-
- mutex_unlock(&dbs_info->cdbs.shared->timer_mutex);
cancel_delayed_work_sync(&dbs_info->cdbs.dwork);
- mutex_lock(&dbs_info->cdbs.shared->timer_mutex);

gov_queue_work(dbs_data, policy,
usecs_to_jiffies(new_rate), true);

}
- mutex_unlock(&dbs_info->cdbs.shared->timer_mutex);
}
}

--
2.4.0

--
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/