From: Schspa Shi <schspa@gmail.com>
To: rafael@kernel.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, schspa@gmail.com
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/2] cpufreq: make interface functions and lock holding state clear
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 21:52:31 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220512135231.10076-2-schspa@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220512135231.10076-1-schspa@gmail.com>
cpufreq_offline() calls offline() and exit() under the policy rwsem
But they are called outside the rwsem in cpufreq_online().
This patch move the offline(), exit(), online(), init() to be inside
of policy rwsem to achieve a clear lock relationship.
All the init() online() implement only initialize policy object without
holding this lock and won't call cpufreq APIs need to hold this lock.
Signed-off-by: Schspa Shi <schspa@gmail.com>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index 35dffd738580..f242d5488364 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1343,12 +1343,12 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
down_write(&policy->rwsem);
policy->cpu = cpu;
policy->governor = NULL;
- up_write(&policy->rwsem);
} else {
new_policy = true;
policy = cpufreq_policy_alloc(cpu);
if (!policy)
return -ENOMEM;
+ down_write(&policy->rwsem);
}
if (!new_policy && cpufreq_driver->online) {
@@ -1388,7 +1388,6 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
cpumask_copy(policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus);
}
- down_write(&policy->rwsem);
/*
* affected cpus must always be the one, which are online. We aren't
* managing offline cpus here.
@@ -1540,7 +1539,6 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
remove_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, get_cpu_device(j));
cpumask_clear(policy->cpus);
- up_write(&policy->rwsem);
out_offline_policy:
if (cpufreq_driver->offline)
@@ -1549,6 +1547,7 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
out_exit_policy:
if (cpufreq_driver->exit)
cpufreq_driver->exit(policy);
+ up_write(&policy->rwsem);
out_free_policy:
cpufreq_policy_free(policy);
--
2.29.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-12 13:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-12 13:52 [PATCH v4 1/2] cpufreq: fix race on cpufreq online Schspa Shi
2022-05-12 13:52 ` Schspa Shi [this message]
2022-05-12 14:44 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] cpufreq: make interface functions and lock holding state clear Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-05-12 16:01 ` Schspa Shi
2022-05-12 16:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-05-13 4:29 ` Viresh Kumar
2022-05-15 9:53 ` [cpufreq] 0a020f0eff: WARNING:possible_recursive_locking_detected kernel test robot
2022-05-15 9:53 ` kernel test robot
2022-05-16 2:35 ` Schspa Shi
2022-05-16 2:35 ` Schspa Shi
2022-05-13 4:18 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] cpufreq: fix race on cpufreq online Viresh Kumar
2022-05-13 6:06 ` Schspa Shi
2022-05-13 6:13 ` Viresh Kumar
2022-05-13 11:16 ` Schspa Shi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220512135231.10076-2-schspa@gmail.com \
--to=schspa@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.