cpufreq: governor: Use common mutex for dbs_data protection
Every governor relying on the common code in cpufreq_governor.c
has to provide its own mutex in struct common_dbs_data. However,
there actually is no need to have a separate mutex per governor
for this purpose, they may be using the same global mutex just
fine. Accordingly, introduce a single common mutex for that and
drop the mutex field from struct common_dbs_data.
That at least will ensure that the mutex is always present and
initialized regardless of what the particular governors do.
Another benefit is that the common code does not need a pointer to
a governor-related structure to get to the mutex which sometimes
helps.
Finally, it makes the code generally easier to follow.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Acked-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
index 6bc2f50..f291fdd 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c
@@ -22,6 +22,9 @@
#include "cpufreq_governor.h"
+DEFINE_MUTEX(dbs_data_mutex);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dbs_data_mutex);
+
static struct attribute_group *get_sysfs_attr(struct dbs_data *dbs_data)
{
if (have_governor_per_policy())
@@ -543,7 +546,7 @@
int ret;
/* Lock governor to block concurrent initialization of governor */
- mutex_lock(&cdata->mutex);
+ mutex_lock(&dbs_data_mutex);
if (have_governor_per_policy())
dbs_data = policy->governor_data;
@@ -576,7 +579,7 @@
}
unlock:
- mutex_unlock(&cdata->mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&dbs_data_mutex);
return ret;
}
