From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
To: Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Lenny Szubowicz <lszubowi@redhat.com>,
"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq, store_scaling_governor requires policy->rwsem to be held for duration of changing governors [v2]
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 18:20:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53E158C1.6010701@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53E1556B.5070304@codeaurora.org>
On 08/05/2014 06:06 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On 08/05/2014 03:53 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 5 August 2014 16:17, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> Nope, not a stupid question. After reproducing (finally!) yesterday I've been
>>> wondering the same thing.
>>
>> Good to know that :)
>>
>>> I've been looking into *exactly* this. On any platform where
>>> cpu_weight(affected_cpus) == 1 for a particular cpu this lockdep trace should
>>> happen.
>>
>>> That's what I'm wondering too. I'm going to instrument the code to find out
>>> this morning. I'm wondering if this comes down to a lockdep class issue
>>> (perhaps lockdep puts globally defined locks like cpufreq_global_kobject in a
>>> different class?).
>>
>> Maybe, I tried this Hack to make this somewhat similar to the other case
>> on my platform with just two CPUs:
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> index 6f02485..6b4abac 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ static DEFINE_MUTEX(cpufreq_governor_mutex);
>>
>> bool have_governor_per_policy(void)
>> {
>> - return !!(cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY);
>> + return !(cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY);
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(have_governor_per_policy);
>>
>>
>> This should result in something similar to setting that per-policy-governor
>> flag (Actually I could have done that too :)), and I couldn't see that crash :(
>>
>> That needs more investigation now, probably we can get some champ of
>> sysfs stuff like Tejun/Greg into discussion now..
>
> Stephen and I looked into this. This is not a sysfs framework difference. The
> reason we don't have this issue when we use global tunables is because we add
> the attribute group to the cpufreq_global_kobject and that kobject doesn't have
> a kobj_type ops similar to the per policy kobject. So, read/write to those
> attributes do NOT go through the generic show/store ops that wrap every other
> cpufreq framework attribute read/writes.
>
> So, none of those read/write do any kind of locking. They don't race with
> POLICY_EXIT (because we remove the sysfs group first thing in POLICY_EXIT) but
> might still race with START/STOPs (not sure, haven't looked closely yet).
>
> For example, writing to sampling_rate of ondemand governor might cause a race in
> update_sampling_rate(). It could race and happen between a STOP and POLICY_EXIT
> (triggered by hotplug, gov change, etc).
>
> So, this might be a completely separate bug that needs fixing when we don't use
> per policy govs.
Yeah, the show_one & store_one macros don't have any locking in them :/.
Okay ... at least that isn't the issue. I spent 1/2 the day trying to figure
out why
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index fa11a7d..6297c76 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -745,12 +745,14 @@ static struct attribute *default_attrs[] = {
#define to_policy(k) container_of(k, struct cpufreq_policy, kobj)
#define to_attr(a) container_of(a, struct freq_attr, attr)
+/* PRARIT - in the CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY, this is used */
static ssize_t show(struct kobject *kobj, struct attribute *attr, char *buf)
{
struct cpufreq_policy *policy = to_policy(kobj);
struct freq_attr *fattr = to_attr(attr);
ssize_t ret;
+ printk("%s: kobject %p\n", __FUNCTION__, kobj);
if (!down_read_trylock(&cpufreq_rwsem))
return -EINVAL;
wasn't printing the kobject line when acpi-cpufreq didn't have the
CPUFREQ_HAVE_GOVERNOR_PER_POLICY flag. And I agree ... it is a bug.
P.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-05 22:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-29 11:46 [PATCH] cpufreq, store_scaling_governor requires policy->rwsem to be held for duration of changing governors [v2] Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-30 0:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-30 14:18 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-30 21:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-31 1:36 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 2:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-31 2:07 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 10:16 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 10:21 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 10:23 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 16:36 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-31 17:57 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 18:38 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-07-31 18:26 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 20:24 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 20:30 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 20:38 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 21:08 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-07-31 22:13 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-07-31 22:58 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-01 0:55 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-01 10:24 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-01 10:27 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-01 17:18 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-08-01 19:15 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-01 19:36 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-08-01 19:43 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-01 19:54 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-08-01 21:25 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-04 10:11 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-05 7:46 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-05 10:47 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-05 10:53 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-05 22:06 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-05 22:20 ` Prarit Bhargava [this message]
2014-08-05 22:40 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-05 22:42 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-05 22:51 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-13 19:57 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-14 18:16 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-06 8:10 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-06 10:09 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-06 15:08 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-08-07 6:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-07 10:12 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-07 10:15 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-12 9:03 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-12 11:33 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-13 7:39 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-13 9:58 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-14 4:19 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-04 10:36 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-04 12:25 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-04 13:38 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-04 14:00 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-04 15:04 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-08-04 20:16 ` Saravana Kannan
2014-08-05 6:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-08-05 6:29 ` skannan
2014-08-05 6:43 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-10-13 10:43 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-10-13 11:52 ` Prarit Bhargava
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=53E158C1.6010701@redhat.com \
--to=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lszubowi@redhat.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=skannan@codeaurora.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).