Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc6-V0.7.47-20

[Michal Schmidt <xschmi00@stud.feec.vutbr.cz>]

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Esben Nielsen <simlo@phys.au.dk> wrote:
>
>
> > Hey,
> > This is an old problem of cpu_freq.c not compiling. I (re)send a fix 
> > for it. This time as a real patch...
>
>
> thanks - i've applied it and have released the -47-27 patch with this 
> fix included.

Yes, that's an obviously safe fix.
I asked on the cpufreq mailing list about this lock. Here's the answer I 
got from Dominik Brodowski:

Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 06:57:12PM +0200, Michal Schmidt wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> > I think that it's not necessary to take the policy->lock in cpufreq_add_dev.
> > Am I missing something? What is the lock supposed to protect from?
>
>
> Well, indeed it is not necessary to take the policy->lock, although it
> doesn't do any harm AFAICS. I added it to make sure that _all_ accesses to
> the data is protected by the lock, how serialized they may ever be..
>
> Thanks,
> 	Dominik


Michal
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/