linux-pm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: rjw@sisk.pl, swarren@wwwdotorg.org,
	linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org,
	cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] cpufreq: use correct values of cpus in __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish()
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 12:10:17 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <523161D1.9040005@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8f777cc6b41b2fed4bf71ce2adc36800353d5738.1378963070.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

On 09/12/2013 10:55 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> This broke after a recent change "cedb70a cpufreq: Split __cpufreq_remove_dev()
> into two parts" from Srivatsa..
> 
> Consider a scenario where we have two CPUs in a policy (0 & 1) and we are
> removing cpu 1. On the call to __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare() we have cleared 1
> from policy->cpus and now on a call to __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish() we read
> cpumask_weight of policy->cpus, which will come as 1 and this code will behave
> as if we are removing the last cpu from policy :)
> 
> Fix it by clearing cpu mask in __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish() instead of
> __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare().
>

Oops! Good catch!

That said, your fix doesn't look correct. See below.
 
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 14 +++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 0e11fcb..b556d46 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1175,12 +1175,9 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(struct device *dev,
>  			policy->governor->name, CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN);
>  #endif
> 
> -	WARN_ON(lock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu));
> +	lock_policy_rwsem_read(cpu);
>  	cpus = cpumask_weight(policy->cpus);
> -
> -	if (cpus > 1)
> -		cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus);
> -	unlock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu);
> +	unlock_policy_rwsem_read(cpu);
> 
>  	if (cpu != policy->cpu) {
>  		if (!frozen)

Around here, we call cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu(), and if we haven't cleared
the CPU by then, there is a chance that it will nominate the same CPU that we are
taking offline. So its important to clear the CPU before that point.

> @@ -1222,9 +1219,12 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish(struct device *dev,
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
> 
> -	lock_policy_rwsem_read(cpu);
> +	WARN_ON(lock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu));
>  	cpus = cpumask_weight(policy->cpus);
> -	unlock_policy_rwsem_read(cpu);
> +
> +	if (cpus > 1)
> +		cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, policy->cpus);
> +	unlock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu);
>

Perhaps we can retain the above as a read operation, ...
 
>  	/* If cpu is last user of policy, free policy */
>  	if (cpus == 1) {
> 
... and change this suitably (from 1 to 0 etc..) ? To add to it, it will look more
clear as well:

if (cpus == 0) {
	/* No cpus in policy, so free it */
} else {
	/* Restart governor */
}

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat

  reply	other threads:[~2013-09-12  6:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-09-12  5:25 [PATCH 0/5] cpufreq: Last minute fixes for 3.12 Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 1/5] cpufreq: Remove extra blank line Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:16   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12 10:08     ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 2/5] cpufreq: don't break string in print statements Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:11   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 3/5] cpufreq: remove __cpufreq_remove_dev() Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:09   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 4/5] cpufreq: don't update policy->cpu while removing while removing other CPUs Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  8:13   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  5:25 ` [PATCH 5/5] cpufreq: use correct values of cpus in __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish() Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  6:40   ` Srivatsa S. Bhat [this message]
2013-09-12  6:47     ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  6:56       ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12  7:16         ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-12  9:21           ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 10:47             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-12 10:43               ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 10:56                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-12 10:49                   ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 18:08             ` Stephen Warren
2013-09-17 15:20   ` Stephen Warren
2013-09-17 16:18     ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-17 18:43       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-18  4:31       ` Viresh Kumar
2013-09-12 10:05 ` [PATCH 0/5] cpufreq: Last minute fixes for 3.12 Viresh Kumar

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=523161D1.9040005@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=patches@linaro.org \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
    --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).