Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 13 Jun 2022 12:23:25 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] thermal: cpufreq_cooling: Use a copy of local ops for each cooling device | From | Lukasz Luba <> |
| |
On 6/13/22 11:53, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 13-06-22, 11:37, Lukasz Luba wrote: >> Hi Viresh, >> >> Thank you for the ACKs in the other patches and suggestion in this one. >> >> On 6/13/22 10:16, Viresh Kumar wrote: >>> On 10-06-22, 11:03, Lukasz Luba wrote: >>>> It is very unlikely that one CPU cluster would have the EM and some other >>>> won't have it (because EM registration failed or DT lacks needed entry). >>>> Although, we should avoid modifying global variable with callbacks anyway. >>>> Redesign this and add safety for such situation. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/thermal/cpufreq_cooling.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- >>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpufreq_cooling.c b/drivers/thermal/cpufreq_cooling.c >>>> index b8151d95a806..e33183785fac 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/thermal/cpufreq_cooling.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpufreq_cooling.c >>>> @@ -554,7 +554,12 @@ __cpufreq_cooling_register(struct device_node *np, >>>> /* max_level is an index, not a counter */ >>>> cpufreq_cdev->max_level = i - 1; >>>> - cooling_ops = &cpufreq_cooling_ops; >>>> + cooling_ops = kmemdup(&cpufreq_cooling_ops, sizeof(*cooling_ops), >>>> + GFP_KERNEL); >>> >>> I don't like the way we are duplicating the ops here. Instead of this it would >>> be better to add the OPs field in the cooling device structure and fill its >>> fields from here. The ops structure will be allocated with the cooling device >>> itself. >>> >> >> I think I know what you mean. Make sense. There are quite a few >> different cooling types of devices which are using the API >> thermal_of_cooling_device_register() with the custom 'ops'. We >> probably don't want to disturb that well working drivers and ecosystem. > > I was just suggesting to update "struct cpufreq_cooling_device" :) > > This is what I was, wrongly, referring to as cooling device. > > I should have written the exact structure name instead, my bad. >
No worries. Thanks, I'll send a v2 with these changes.
| |