linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: nm@ti.com, Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	sboyd@kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Douglas Raillard <Douglas.Raillard@arm.com>,
	Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	LAK <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] dev_pm_opp refcount issue on Arm Juno r0
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 10:33:39 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190103103318.GA23511@e107155-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190103070514.o6yaqvpxouazosnn@vireshk-i7>

On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 12:35:14PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:

[...]

> @Sudeep: Please help review it as well.
> 
> -- 
> viresh
> 
> -------------------------8<-------------------------
> 
> From f3913738618031e9d71ebf64461cee22909e6e20 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> Message-Id: <f3913738618031e9d71ebf64461cee22909e6e20.1546498940.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 12:28:26 +0530
> Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: scpi: Fix freeing of OPPs
> 
> Since the commit 2a4eb7358aba ("OPP: Don't remove dynamic OPPs from
> _dev_pm_opp_remove_table()"), dynamically created OPP aren't
> automatically removed anymore by dev_pm_opp_cpumask_remove_table().
> 
> The OPPs for scpi cpufreq driver aren't getting freed currently, fix
> that by adding a new callback scpi_ops->remove_device_opps() which will
> remove those OPPs.
> 
> Cc: 4.20 <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.20
> Reported-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
> Fixes: 2a4eb7358aba ("OPP: Don't remove dynamic OPPs from _dev_pm_opp_remove_table()")
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c |  4 ++--
>  drivers/firmware/arm_scpi.c    | 15 +++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/scpi_protocol.h  |  1 +
>  3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c
> index 87a98ec77773..1bfd168de0b2 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/scpi-cpufreq.c
> @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ static int scpi_cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  out_free_priv:
>  	kfree(priv);
>  out_free_opp:
> -	dev_pm_opp_cpumask_remove_table(policy->cpus);
> +	scpi_ops->remove_device_opps(cpu_dev);
>  
>  	return ret;
>  }
> @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ static int scpi_cpufreq_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>  	clk_put(priv->clk);
>  	dev_pm_opp_free_cpufreq_table(priv->cpu_dev, &policy->freq_table);
>  	kfree(priv);
> -	dev_pm_opp_cpumask_remove_table(policy->related_cpus);
> +	scpi_ops->remove_device_opps(priv->cpu_dev);
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scpi.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scpi.c
> index c7d06a36b23a..963f2ffbd820 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scpi.c
> @@ -716,6 +716,20 @@ static int scpi_dvfs_add_opps_to_device(struct device *dev)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static void scpi_dvfs_remove_device_opps(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	int idx;
> +	struct scpi_opp *opp;
> +	struct scpi_dvfs_info *info = scpi_dvfs_info(dev);
> +
> +	/* We already added OPPs successfully, this data can't be invalid */

As you already state the checks are unnecessary, if we drop them we don't need
to add any firmware specific callbacks. I am thinking if it makes sense to
add a generic helper function to remove the OPPs from a device. If we have
that any driver needing that can use it. The main reason I think helper is
useful is that we need exactly same fix for SCMI driver too.

Thoughts ?

--
Regards,
Sudeep

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-01-03 10:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-20 15:27 [BUG] dev_pm_opp refcount issue on Arm Juno r0 Valentin Schneider
2019-01-03  7:05 ` Viresh Kumar
2019-01-03 10:33   ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2019-01-03 10:38     ` Viresh Kumar
2019-01-03 10:41       ` Sudeep Holla
2019-01-04  9:44 ` [PATCH] cpufreq: scpi/scmi: Fix freeing of dynamic OPPs Viresh Kumar
2019-01-04 10:10   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-01-04 10:16     ` Viresh Kumar
2019-01-04 10:40   ` Valentin Schneider
2019-01-04 11:01   ` Sudeep Holla
2019-01-11 10:37     ` Rafael J. Wysocki

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=20190103103318.GA23511@e107155-lin \
    --to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=Douglas.Raillard@arm.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nm@ti.com \
    --cc=quentin.perret@arm.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).