From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: Check for dev before deregistering it. Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 11:09:11 -0500 Message-ID: <20131204160911.GB391@pegasus.dumpdata.com> References: <1386086398-3686-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com> <3652709.SMvyaH5n9G@vostro.rjw.lan> <529EF184.3090000@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:32263 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755787Ab3LDQJY (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Dec 2013 11:09:24 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <529EF184.3090000@linaro.org> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Lezcano Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 10:10:28AM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 12/03/2013 10:33 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >On Tuesday, December 03, 2013 10:59:58 AM Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >>If not, we could end up in the unfortunate situation where > >>we dereference a NULL pointer b/c we have cpuidle disabled. > >> > >>This is the case when booting under Xen (which uses the > >>ACPI P/C states but disables the CPU idle driver) - and can > >>be easily reproduced when booting with cpuidle.off=1. > >> > >>BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at (null) > >>IP: [] cpuidle_unregister_device+0x2a/0x90 > >>.. snip.. > >>Call Trace: > >> [] acpi_processor_power_exit+0x3c/0x5c > >> [] acpi_processor_stop+0x61/0xb6 > >> [] __device_release_driver+0fffff81421653>] device_release_driver+0x23/0x30 > >> [] bus_remove_device+0x108/0x180 > >> [] device_del+0x129/0x1c0 > >> [] ? unregister_xenbus_watch+0x1f0/0x1f0 > >> [] device_unregister+0x1e/0x60 > >> [] unregister_cpu+0x39/0x60 > >> [] arch_unregister_cpu+0x23/0x30 > >> [] handle_vcpu_hotplug_event+0xc1/0xe0 > >> [] xenwatch_thread+0x45/0x120 > >> [] ? abort_exclusive_wait+0xb0/0xb0 > >> [] kthread+0xd2/0xf0 > >> [] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x180/0x180 > >> [] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0 > >> [] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x180/0x180 > >> > >>This problem also appears in 3.12 and could be a candidate for backport. > >> > >>CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" > >>CC: Daniel Lezcano > >>CC: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org > >>Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > > > >Applied, thanks! > > > >>--- > >> drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >>diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c > >>index 2a991e4..a55e68f 100644 > >>--- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c > >>+++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c > >>@@ -400,7 +400,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpuidle_register_device); > >> */ > >> void cpuidle_unregister_device(struct cpuidle_device *dev) > >> { > >>- if (dev->registered == 0) > >>+ if (!dev || dev->registered == 0) > >> return; > >> > >> cpuidle_pause_and_lock(); > > Oops, wait. Are we sure the problem is coming from cpuidle ? It is acpi_processor_power_exit assuming that the cpuidle is initialized. It could be fixed there too, but there are multiple entries in cpuidle where it does the : "if (!dev) return .." so I figured this should be done as well here. > > The cpuidle_unregister_device is called with a NULL pointer, that > shouldn't happen. It does :-) > > Konrad, you say that could be easily reproduced. How do you produce > it ? Unplugging a cpu ? Yes.