From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Juri Lelli Subject: [RFC PATCH 05/19] cpufreq: assert locking when accessing cpufreq_policy_list Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 17:35:46 +0000 Message-ID: <1452533760-13787-6-git-send-email-juri.lelli@arm.com> References: <1452533760-13787-1-git-send-email-juri.lelli@arm.com> Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1452533760-13787-1-git-send-email-juri.lelli@arm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, mturquette@baylibre.com, steve.muckle@linaro.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, morten.rasmussen@arm.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, juri.lelli@arm.com List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org cpufreq_policy_list is guarded by cpufreq_driver_lock. Add appropriate locking assertions to check that we always access the list while holding the associated lock. Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Viresh Kumar Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c index 00a00cd..63d6efb 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ static bool suitable_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, bool active) static struct cpufreq_policy *next_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, bool active) { + lockdep_assert_held(&cpufreq_driver_lock); do { policy = list_next_entry(policy, policy_list); @@ -80,6 +81,7 @@ static struct cpufreq_policy *first_policy(bool active) { struct cpufreq_policy *policy; + lockdep_assert_held(&cpufreq_driver_lock); /* No policies in the list */ if (list_empty(&cpufreq_policy_list)) return NULL; @@ -2430,6 +2432,7 @@ int cpufreq_register_driver(struct cpufreq_driver *driver_data) if (ret) goto err_boost_unreg; + lockdep_assert_held(&cpufreq_driver_lock); if (!(cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_STICKY) && list_empty(&cpufreq_policy_list)) { /* if all ->init() calls failed, unregister */ -- 2.2.2