From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 665FFC43387 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2019 10:33:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 374DA20815 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2019 10:33:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="IegGP/44" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 374DA20815 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=yfjVkuPhRWHuBeMbyrnYfWIIpDX88Rja4pA7oLnZQnE=; b=IegGP/44BvBMAk +QXSWMCTrekAADwCzG35ahCc94zXZe8V2/mVK8jfbGrMgobPJtb+ofg17xpVnBVoilQ7WK7+YwCdl Ho2zsnzqfrmQbsK+jWnH+OApgs7PF5cR/VF2mibNYBw/8TEXVQnPq9p4+/YgE3fH1BKPLK8+z2ccc I0VUhYiJxYdz+uY3vCLp3Ufi7DzfnNvzQWol8q+7U0rsj34WGP5zee43+hK50NxBtW6quY4DxafT1 V//GGHA/jD0JM6mPbbF81VPjv2x4qDA7ast125306YwKABcxoH0Y3fVJmY0BDEdG/jMRZ2rMmvqZp nNuEMtmq10L8z4Vmnm/A==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gf0K0-0003bw-Hm; Thu, 03 Jan 2019 10:33:52 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70] helo=foss.arm.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gf0Jx-0003a1-Iw for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2019 10:33:51 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A1D780D; Thu, 3 Jan 2019 02:33:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from e107155-lin (e107155-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.42]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E8EF13F5D4; Thu, 3 Jan 2019 02:33:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 10:33:39 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla To: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [BUG] dev_pm_opp refcount issue on Arm Juno r0 Message-ID: <20190103103318.GA23511@e107155-lin> References: <20190103070514.o6yaqvpxouazosnn@vireshk-i7> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190103070514.o6yaqvpxouazosnn@vireshk-i7> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190103_023349_644437_BF06CC88 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 21.68 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: nm@ti.com, Linux PM , sboyd@kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel , Dietmar Eggemann , Quentin Perret , Sudeep Holla , Douglas Raillard , Valentin Schneider , LAK Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org 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: > From: Viresh Kumar > 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 # v4.20 > Reported-by: Valentin Schneider > Fixes: 2a4eb7358aba ("OPP: Don't remove dynamic OPPs from _dev_pm_opp_remove_table()") > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar > --- > 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