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=-8.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 C3F32C32771 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 06:14:07 +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 9544C2073A for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 06:14:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="tCgO86S6"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="rHrnilph" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9544C2073A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.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=V9psrHyZZZrKNyU4Esk0qtsqDPyyFyiuNyWthzz5SIs=; b=tCgO86S6TY3Kf8 QKgLy5zTrsd4QctU+uN/NtaIgO/Mcf3DuhXpqO6QRmQjiUnT7rlL0iS+PPLLPm+sWzW2JOa2HltXj AUl8+o10+Cq+d8dODGKtvCZtazvLtSagvGHrT/PZQa4TiRNdhevRfFy5M2kOZfAzqZkUsKpjC8FuG ViM5HumZpZOg//UHTWsGsKRfvP+xhSA4LoXGe96myeSuAEeyB64sEZPwQku91/iHStK+iVwvssq5Q oOVYDHmmkhRgVIrBebvJXOJyr5U5dEoHpKVYyYCDEaPZ6HD5m784vYu8X6NBlarDQ+tNjPvX2mFgg HjfuHoO0tVwBmAl/rHCA==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1itQK3-00050J-O2; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 06:14:03 +0000 Received: from mail-pj1-x1041.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::1041]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1itQK0-0004zS-DX for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 06:14:01 +0000 Received: by mail-pj1-x1041.google.com with SMTP id d5so6253028pjz.5 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2020 22:13:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=HEnK5zOWrM4EtjOOUObaQ50k2YuQm6+zLeTAwK5KuFw=; b=rHrnilphdbZXls873AYNAy/Pyu163ib9A5hLLJVruxIy8qlPn78vsdw6+F36xjOgce XjdI2PGOVTosulcFr+I0I5kswvr43SJZMn35UnIJTas0+ticPMhCqLCULN2KicOVEwfn qXAvCc5CQyI7g4xLpCZ9xC2j8R84/hke00FsZCqQsdXYz31l/7k3F4xLnT74wmJKZg5I hy1WemXy5OyVXEZq2zrqKLxzuzGubxV+kdR3gdcoJef86dBgSeHCgXS1cpveLgr6SUW8 5iTXwX6/ZPItEwg6Z7uBF+4kanfO77E94NKSbqeL9wTWdW1qc2EvtdLE3TvJmMvhKg7S pH1g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=HEnK5zOWrM4EtjOOUObaQ50k2YuQm6+zLeTAwK5KuFw=; b=NE2NyXDf0pkp+rdoZBkIX1Ws0HJ7kex74kVQaXlafUmo/w4ag7XVvY9gm378a/6PVC lUPKo07v7jU0737mLOUiaPTKjbFFV4tYmwxEbiN6p1RUi0j2A5B6Gnm5X/33th8V51AB O0g+L+P1M5zKqszpBJgOVraN8bPrRq+KjyPeIGeInZeTNOWYdRng3ZSIfkgWM2YPb7+Z BFZa+XtJRc4M/6JOr2HgM39JoKWfd6yPCKdW3Uqj3OSpJsV6MIggmeyc8jIAY/yh0KQO TIw5SaA0CZSjlVK7EhbwCCfVedqEp0zrkAzZOd/YPZVKmpBR1gR41AnajMe+fb9g5//s rm5Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVJp6HBHumsoaKFCqrwjIQYXE8SR/OF6/8NHR40Bzip9FO5XVAX fXXOHTSMFI+BIBNc4u39NM4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy5vJY131Lor3YeVDhjCpeI3gktCtJOpO+P6J1mFr58LYnjO2gN5V2DNmNZVLK3YEshLDX/sA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b617:: with SMTP id b23mr13530550pls.285.1579500839281; Sun, 19 Jan 2020 22:13:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([43.224.245.179]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y14sm37008006pfe.147.2020.01.19.22.13.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 19 Jan 2020 22:13:58 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 14:13:56 +0800 From: chenqiwu To: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] cpufreq: brcmstb-avs: fix imbalance of cpufreq policy refcount Message-ID: <20200120061356.GA5605@cqw-OptiPlex-7050> References: <1579417750-21984-1-git-send-email-qiwuchen55@gmail.com> <20200120053250.igkwofqfzvmqb3c3@vireshk-i7> <20200120055822.GB5185@cqw-OptiPlex-7050> <20200120060134.izotrbzjvzk327zx@vireshk-i7> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200120060134.izotrbzjvzk327zx@vireshk-i7> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200119_221400_482339_FF7AA01E X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 24.27 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: f.fainelli@gmail.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, mmayer@broadcom.com, chenqiwu , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org 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 Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 11:31:34AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 20-01-20, 13:58, chenqiwu wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 11:02:50AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > On 19-01-20, 15:09, qiwuchen55@gmail.com wrote: > > > > From: chenqiwu > > > > > > > > brcm_avs_cpufreq_get() calls cpufreq_cpu_get() to get the cpufreq policy, > > > > meanwhile, it also increments the kobject reference count to mark it busy. > > > > However, a corresponding call of cpufreq_cpu_put() is ignored to decrement > > > > the kobject reference count back, which may lead to a potential stuck risk > > > > that the cpuhp thread deadly waits for dropping of kobject refcount when > > > > cpufreq policy free. > > > > > > > > For fixing this bug, cpufreq_get_policy() is referenced to do a proper > > > > cpufreq_cpu_get()/cpufreq_cpu_put() and fill a policy copy for the user. > > > > If the policy return NULL, we just return 0 to hit the code path of > > > > cpufreq_driver->get. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: chenqiwu > > > > --- > > > > drivers/cpufreq/brcmstb-avs-cpufreq.c | 12 ++++++++++-- > > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/brcmstb-avs-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/brcmstb-avs-cpufreq.c > > > > index 77b0e5d..ee0d404 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/brcmstb-avs-cpufreq.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/brcmstb-avs-cpufreq.c > > > > @@ -452,8 +452,16 @@ static bool brcm_avs_is_firmware_loaded(struct private_data *priv) > > > > > > > > static unsigned int brcm_avs_cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu) > > > > { > > > > - struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); > > > > > > Why can't we just add a corresponding cpufreq_cpu_put() instead of all this ? > > > > > > > cpufreq_get_policy() does a proper cpufreq_cpu_get()/cpufreq_cpu_put(), > > meanwhile fills a policy copy for the user. It equals to using > > cpufreq_cpu_get() and a corresponding cpufreq_cpu_put() around access > > to the policy pointer. I think both methods are fine here. > > What do you think? > > cpufreq_get_policy() does an extra memcpy as well, which isn't required at all > in your case. > > -- > viresh Huha..Do you worry about the race conditon with cpufreq policy free path? If the policy has been released, cpufreq_get_policy() will return -EINVAL, it won't do an extra memcpy. Qiwu _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel