From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Viresh Kumar <vireshk@kernel.org>,
Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: use of_cpu_device_node_get() instead of of_get_cpu_node()
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 09:53:47 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171011042347.GL4031@vireshk-i7> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cc282f1b-0b36-bf45-6a0b-5e017c3c44ea@arm.com>
On 10-10-17, 13:39, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> We didn't take the reference before commit 762792913f8c as we were using
> cpu_dev->of_node directly.
Yeah, and so the refcount was never screwed for us.
> The above mentioned commit used
> of_get_cpu_node() which introduces the reference.
And it missing putting it down and we missed catching that in reviews.
> So I assumed it
> shouldn't matter much and in order to keep the change simple, I did it
> before _opp_of_get_opp_desc_node. I can move just after
> _opp_of_get_opp_desc_node and before if check to avoid having both
> before failure goto and after the block.
So the right thing to do based on current code is to put the reference only
after we are done using the pointer.
--
viresh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-11 4:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-10 10:48 [PATCH] PM / OPP: use of_cpu_device_node_get() instead of of_get_cpu_node() Sudeep Holla
2017-10-10 11:45 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-10-10 12:39 ` Sudeep Holla
2017-10-10 15:54 ` Sudeep Holla
2017-10-10 17:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-10 17:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-10 17:20 ` Sudeep Holla
2017-10-11 4:23 ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2017-10-11 10:11 ` [PATCH v2] PM / OPP: add missing of_node_put() for of_get_cpu_node() Sudeep Holla
2017-10-11 10:21 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-10-11 10:35 ` Sudeep Holla
2017-10-11 10:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-10-11 11:21 ` Sudeep Holla
2017-10-11 20:20 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-10-12 8:50 ` Sudeep Holla
2017-10-12 10:32 ` [PATCH v3] " Sudeep Holla
2017-10-12 20:58 ` Stephen Boyd
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171011042347.GL4031@vireshk-i7 \
--to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nm@ti.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=vireshk@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox