On 09-01-17, 15:36, Stephen Boyd wrote:

On 12/07, Viresh Kumar wrote:

quoted

@@ -894,8 +895,36 @@ static void _kfree_device_rcu(struct rcu_head *head)
 	kfree_rcu(opp_table, rcu_head);
 }
 
-static void _free_opp_table(struct opp_table *opp_table)
+void _get_opp_table_kref(struct opp_table *opp_table)
 {
+	kref_get(&opp_table->kref);
+}
+
+struct opp_table *dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(struct device *dev)
+{
+	struct opp_table *opp_table;
+
+	/* Hold our table modification lock here */
+	mutex_lock(&opp_table_lock);
+
+	opp_table = _find_opp_table(dev);
+	if (!IS_ERR(opp_table)) {
+		_get_opp_table_kref(opp_table);

It seems odd to have _get_opp_table_kref() take a pointer to
increment a kref on.

This function is provided for better readability and passing opp_table to it is
the only option I had :)

It would be better to have _find_opp_table()
return the pointer with the reference already taken so that we
don't have to update callers with reference grabbing calls.
Typically if a function returns a reference counted pointer the
reference counting has already been done.

Absolutely, but that happens with later patches in the series. I couldn't have
done it now, as something or the other would have broken.

-- 
viresh