@@ -1320,11 +1320,9 @@ struct opp_table *dev_pm_opp_set_regulators(struct device *dev,
goto err;
}
- /* Already have regulators set */
- if (opp_table->regulators) {
- ret = -EBUSY;
- goto err;
- }
+ /* Another CPU that shares the OPP table has set the regulators ? */
+ if (opp_table->regulators)
+ return opp_table;
opp_table->regulators = kmalloc_array(count,
sizeof(*opp_table->regulators),
@@ -1378,10 +1376,8 @@ void dev_pm_opp_put_regulators(struct opp_table *opp_table)
{
int i;
- if (!opp_table->regulators) {
- pr_err("%s: Doesn't have regulators set\n", __func__);
- return;
- }
+ if (!opp_table->regulators)
+ goto put_opp_table;
/* Make sure there are no concurrent readers while updating opp_table */
WARN_ON(!list_empty(&opp_table->opp_list));
@@ -1395,6 +1391,7 @@ void dev_pm_opp_put_regulators(struct opp_table *opp_table)
opp_table->regulators = NULL;
opp_table->regulator_count = 0;
+put_opp_table:
dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(opp_table);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_opp_put_regulators);
It should be fine to call dev_pm_opp_set_regulators() for all possible CPUs, even if some of them share the OPP table as the caller may not be aware of sharing policy. Lets increment the reference count of the OPP table and return its pointer. The caller need to call dev_pm_opp_put_regulators() the same number of times later on to drop all the references. To avoid adding another counter to count how many times dev_pm_opp_set_regulators() is called for the same OPP table, dev_pm_opp_put_regulators() frees the resources on the very first call made to it, assuming that the caller would be calling it sequentially for all the CPUs. We can revisit that if that assumption is broken in the future. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> --- drivers/opp/core.c | 15 ++++++--------- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) -- 2.15.0.194.g9af6a3dea062