From: Meelis Roos <mroos@linux.ee>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net, viresh.kumar@linaro.org,
cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: Catch double invocations of cpufreq_freq_transition_begin/end
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 16:09:59 +0300 (EEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.SOC.1.00.1404291609220.3349@math.ut.ee> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140429130506.7052.54268.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>
> v2: Removed the coverage of ASYNC_NOTIFICATION drivers, in order to avoid
> false-positives.
I am confused - on top of what patches should I test it?
>
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 7 +++++++
> include/linux/cpufreq.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index abda660..afcac67 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -354,6 +354,11 @@ static void cpufreq_notify_post_transition(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> void cpufreq_freq_transition_begin(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> struct cpufreq_freqs *freqs)
> {
> +
> + /* Catch double invocations of _begin() which lead to self-deadlock */
> + WARN_ON(!(cpufreq_driver->flags & CPUFREQ_ASYNC_NOTIFICATION)
> + && current == policy->transition_task);
> +
> wait:
> wait_event(policy->transition_wait, !policy->transition_ongoing);
>
> @@ -365,6 +370,7 @@ wait:
> }
>
> policy->transition_ongoing = true;
> + policy->transition_task = current;
>
> spin_unlock(&policy->transition_lock);
>
> @@ -381,6 +387,7 @@ void cpufreq_freq_transition_end(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> cpufreq_notify_post_transition(policy, freqs, transition_failed);
>
> policy->transition_ongoing = false;
> + policy->transition_task = NULL;
>
> wake_up(&policy->transition_wait);
> }
> diff --git a/include/linux/cpufreq.h b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> index 5ae5100..8f44d79 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cpufreq.h
> @@ -110,6 +110,7 @@ struct cpufreq_policy {
> bool transition_ongoing; /* Tracks transition status */
> spinlock_t transition_lock;
> wait_queue_head_t transition_wait;
> + struct task_struct *transition_task; /* Task which is doing the transition */
> };
>
> /* Only for ACPI */
>
--
Meelis Roos (mroos@linux.ee)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-29 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-29 13:06 [PATCH v2] cpufreq: Catch double invocations of cpufreq_freq_transition_begin/end Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-04-29 13:09 ` Meelis Roos [this message]
2014-04-29 13:18 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2014-04-29 13:23 ` 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=alpine.SOC.1.00.1404291609220.3349@math.ut.ee \
--to=mroos@linux.ee \
--cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--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