- 01 8月, 2015 3 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
To protect against races with concurrent CPU online/offline, call get_online_cpus() before registering a cpufreq driver. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The recover_policy is unsed in cpufreq_online() to indicate whether a new policy object is created or an existing one is reinitialized. The "recover" part of the name is slightly confusing (it should be "reinitialization" rather than "recovery") and the logical not (!) operator is applied to it in almost all of the checks it is used in, so replace that variable with a new one called "new_policy" that will be true in the case of a new policy creation. While at it, drop one of the labels that is jumped to from only one spot. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
To separate the CPU online interface from the CPU device registration, split cpufreq_online() out of cpufreq_add_dev() and make cpufreq_cpu_callback() call the former, while cpufreq_add_dev() itself will only be used as the CPU device addition subsystem interface callback. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Suggested-by: NRussell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
- 28 7月, 2015 7 次提交
-
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Change cpufreq_policy_alloc() to take a CPU number instead of a CPU device pointer as its argument, as it is the only function called by cpufreq_add_dev() taking a device pointer argument at this point. That will allow us to split the CPU online part from cpufreq_add_dev() more cleanly going forward. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The related_cpus mask includes CPUs whose cpufreq_cpu_data per-CPU pointers have been set the the given policy. Since those pointers are only set at the policy creation time and unset when the policy is deleted, the related_cpus should not be updated between those two operations. For this reason, avoid updating it whenever the first of the "related" CPUs goes online. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The dev argument of cpufreq_add_policy_cpu() and cpufreq_add_dev_interface() is not used by any of them, so drop it. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
The leftover out_release_rwsem label in cpufreq_add_dev() is not necessary any more and confusing, so drop it. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Notice that when cpufreq_policy_restore() is called, its per-CPU cpufreq_cpu_data variable has been already dereferenced and if that variable is not NULL, the policy local pointer in cpufreq_add_dev() contains its value. Therefore it is not necessary to dereference it again and the policy pointer can be used directly. Moreover, if that pointer is not NULL, the policy is inactive (or the previous check would have made us return from cpufreq_add_dev()) so the restoration code from cpufreq_policy_restore() can be moved to that point in cpufreq_add_dev(). Do that and drop cpufreq_policy_restore(). Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
Since __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare() and __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish() are about CPU offline rather than about CPU removal, rename them to cpufreq_offline_prepare() and cpufreq_offline_finish(), respectively. Also change their argument from a struct device pointer to a CPU number, because they use the CPU number only internally anyway and make them void as their return values are ignored. Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
由 Rafael J. Wysocki 提交于
After commit 87549141 (cpufreq: Stop migrating sysfs files on hotplug) there is a problem with CPUs that share cpufreq policy objects with other CPUs and are initially offline. Say CPU1 shares a policy with CPU0 which is online and is registered first. As part of the registration process, cpufreq_add_dev() is called for it. It creates the policy object and a symbolic link to it from the CPU1's sysfs directory. If CPU1 is registered subsequently and it is offline at that time, cpufreq_add_dev() will attempt to create a symbolic link to the policy object for it, but that link is present already, so a warning about that will be triggered. To avoid that warning, make cpufreq use an additional CPU mask containing related CPUs that are actually present for each policy object. That mask is initialized when the policy object is populated after its creation (for the first online CPU using it) and it includes CPUs from the "policy CPUs" mask returned by the cpufreq driver's ->init() callback that are physically present at that time. Symbolic links to the policy are created only for the CPUs in that mask. If cpufreq_add_dev() is invoked for an offline CPU, it checks the new mask and only creates the symlink if the CPU was not in it (the CPU is added to the mask at the same time). In turn, cpufreq_remove_dev() drops the given CPU from the new mask, removes its symlink to the policy object and returns, unless it is the CPU owning the policy object. In that case, the policy object is moved to a new CPU's sysfs directory or deleted if the CPU being removed was the last user of the policy. While at it, notice that cpufreq_remove_dev() can't fail, because its return value is ignored, so make it ignore return values from __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare() and __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish() and prevent these functions from aborting on errors returned by __cpufreq_governor(). Also drop the now unused sif argument from them. Fixes: 87549141 (cpufreq: Stop migrating sysfs files on hotplug) Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Reported-and-tested-by: NRussell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> Acked-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
-
- 25 7月, 2015 1 次提交
-
-
cpufreq_rwsem was introduced in commit 6eed9404 ("cpufreq: Use rwsem for protecting critical sections) in order to replace try_module_get() on the cpu-freq driver. That try_module_get() worked well until the refcount was so heavily used that module removal became more or less impossible. Though when looking at the various (undocumented) protection mechanisms in that code, the randomly sprinkeled around cpufreq_rwsem locking sites are superfluous. The policy, which is acquired in cpufreq_cpu_get() and released in cpufreq_cpu_put() is sufficiently protected already. cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu) /* Protects against concurrent driver removal */ read_lock_irqsave(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags); policy = per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data, cpu); kobject_get(&policy->kobj); read_unlock_irqrestore(&cpufreq_driver_lock, flags); The reference on the policy serializes versus module unload already: cpufreq_unregister_driver() subsys_interface_unregister() __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish() per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data) = NULL; cpufreq_policy_put_kobj() If there is a reference held on the policy, i.e. obtained prior to the unregister call, then cpufreq_policy_put_kobj() will wait until that reference is dropped. So once subsys_interface_unregister() returns there is no policy pointer in flight and no new reference can be obtained. So that rwsem protection is useless. The other usage of cpufreq_rwsem in show()/store() of the sysfs interface is redundant as well because sysfs already does the proper kobject_get()/put() pairs. That leaves CPU hotplug versus module removal. The current down_write() around the write_lock() in cpufreq_unregister_driver() is silly at best as it protects actually nothing. The trivial solution to this is to prevent hotplug across cpufreq_unregister_driver completely. Signed-off-by: NSebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 21 7月, 2015 1 次提交
-
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
Return codes aren't honored properly in cpufreq_set_policy(). This can lead to two problems: - wrong errors propagated to sysfs - we try to do next state-change even if the previous one failed cpufreq_governor_dbs() now returns proper errors on all invalid state-transition requests and this code should honor that. Reviewed-and-tested-by: NPreeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 17 7月, 2015 2 次提交
-
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
cpufreq_init_policy() can fail, and we don't do anything except a call to ->exit() on that. The policy should be freed if this happens. Do it properly. Reported-and-tested-by: N"Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <tixy@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
These labels are are named in two ways normally: - Based on what caused to jump to such labels - Based on what we do under such labels We follow the first naming convention today and that leads to multiple labels for doing the same work. Fix it by switching to the second way of naming them. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 10 7月, 2015 2 次提交
-
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
Users of freq table may want to access it for any CPU from policy->related_cpus mask. One such user is cpu-cooling layer. It gets a list of 'clip_cpus' (equivalent to policy->related_cpus) during registration and tries to get freq_table for the first CPU of this mask. If the CPU, for which it tries to fetch freq_table, is offline, cpufreq_frequency_get_table() fails. This happens because it relies on cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() for its functioning which returns policy only for online CPUs. The fix is to access the policy data structure for the given CPU directly (which also returns a valid policy for offline CPUs), but the policy itself has to be active (meaning that at least one CPU using it is online) for the frequency table to be returned. Because we will be using 'cpufreq_cpu_data' now, which is internal to the cpufreq core, move cpufreq_frequency_get_table() to cpufreq.c. Reported-and-tested-by: NPi-Cheng Chen <pi-cheng.chen@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
When all CPUs of a policy are hot-unplugged, we EXIT the governor but don't mark policy->governor as NULL. This was done in order to keep last used governor's information intact in sysfs, while the CPUs are offline. But we also need to clear policy->governor when restoring the policy. Because policy->governor still points to the last governor while policy is restored, following sequence of event happens: - cpufreq_init_policy() called while restoring policy - find_governor() matches last_governor string for present governors and returns last used governor's pointer, say ondemand. policy->governor already has the same address, unless the governor was removed in between. - cpufreq_set_policy() is called with both old/new policies governor set as ondemand. - Because governors matched, we skip governor initialization and return after calling __cpufreq_governor(CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS). Because the governor wasn't initialized for this policy, it returned -EBUSY. - cpufreq_init_policy() exits the policy on this error, but doesn't destroy it properly (should be fixed separately). - And so we enter a scenario where the policy isn't completely initialized but used. Fix this by setting policy->governor to NULL while restoring the policy. Reported-and-tested-by: NPi-Cheng Chen <pi-cheng.chen@linaro.org> Reported-and-tested-by: N"Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <tixy@linaro.org> Reported-and-tested-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Fixes: 18bf3a12 (cpufreq: Mark policy->governor = NULL for inactive policies) Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 11 6月, 2015 5 次提交
-
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
cpufreq_update_policy() was kept as a separate routine earlier as it was handling migration of sysfs directories, which isn't the case anymore. It is only updating policy->cpu now and is called by a single caller. The WARN_ON() isn't really required anymore, as we are just updating the cpu now, not moving the sysfs directories. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
__cpufreq_remove_dev_finish() is doing two things today: - Restarts the governor if some CPUs from concerned policy are still online. - Frees the policy if all CPUs are offline. The first task of restarting the governor can be moved to __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare() to restart the governor early. There is no race between _prepare() and _finish() as they would be handling completely different cases. _finish() will only be required if we are going to free the policy and that has nothing to do with restarting the governor. Original-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
cpufreq_policy_put_kobj() is actually part of freeing the policy and can be called from cpufreq_policy_free() directly instead of a separate call. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
policy->kobj is required to be initialized once in the lifetime of a policy. Currently we are initializing it from __cpufreq_add_dev() and that doesn't look to be the best place for doing so as we have to do this on special cases (like: !recover_policy). We can initialize it from a more obvious place cpufreq_policy_alloc() and that will make code look cleaner, specially the error handling part. The error handling part of __cpufreq_add_dev() was doing almost the same thing while recover_policy is true or false. Fix that as well by always calling cpufreq_policy_put_kobj() with an additional parameter to skip notification part of it. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
When we hot-unplug a cpu, we remove its sysfs cpufreq directory and if the outgoing cpu was the owner of policy->kobj earlier then we migrate the sysfs directory to under another online cpu. There are few disadvantages this brings: - Code Complexity - Slower hotplug/suspend/resume - sysfs file permissions are reset after all policy->cpus are offlined - CPUFreq stats history lost after all policy->cpus are offlined - Special management of sysfs stuff during suspend/resume To overcome these, this patch modifies the way sysfs directories are managed: - Select sysfs kobjects owner while initializing policy and don't change it during hotplugs. Track it with kobj_cpu created earlier. - Create symlinks for all related CPUs (can be offline) instead of affected CPUs on policy initialization and remove them only when the policy is freed. - Free policy structure only on the removal of cpufreq-driver and not during hotplug/suspend/resume, detected by checking 'struct subsys_interface *' (Valid only when called from subsys_interface_unregister() while unregistering driver). Apart from this, special care is taken to handle physical hoplug of CPUs as we wouldn't remove sysfs links or remove policies on logical hotplugs. Physical hotplug happens in the following sequence. Hot removal: - CPU is offlined first, ~ 'echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/online' - Then its device is removed along with all sysfs files, cpufreq core notified with cpufreq_remove_dev() callback from subsys-interface.. Hot addition: - First the device along with its sysfs files is added, cpufreq core notified with cpufreq_add_dev() callback from subsys-interface.. - CPU is onlined, ~ 'echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/online' We call the same routines with both hotplug and subsys callbacks, and we sense physical hotplug with cpu_offline() check in subsys callback. We can handle most of the stuff with regular hotplug callback paths and add/remove cpufreq sysfs links or free policy from subsys callbacks. Original-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 10 6月, 2015 1 次提交
-
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
Later commits would change the way policies are managed today. Policies wouldn't be freed on cpu hotplug (currently they aren't freed only for suspend), and while the CPU is offline, the sysfs cpufreq files would still be present. User may accidentally try to update the sysfs files in following directory: '/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/cpufreq/'. And that would result in undefined behavior as policy wouldn't be active then. Apart from updating the store() routine, we also update __cpufreq_get() which can call cpufreq_out_of_sync(). The later routine tries to update policy->cur and starts notifying kernel about it. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 23 5月, 2015 2 次提交
-
-
由 Saravana Kannan 提交于
In order to prepare for the next few commits, that will stop migrating sysfs files on cpu hotplug, this patch starts managing sysfs-cpu separately. The behavior is still the same as we are still migrating sysfs files on hotplug, later commits would change that. Signed-off-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Shailendra Verma 提交于
Signed-off-by: NShailendra Verma <shailendra.capricorn@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 15 5月, 2015 6 次提交
-
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
Later commits would change the way policies are managed today. Policies wouldn't be freed on cpu hotplug (currently they aren't freed on suspend), and while the CPU is offline, the sysfs cpufreq files would still be present. Because we don't mark policy->governor as NULL, it still contains pointer of the last used governor. And if the governor is removed, while all the CPUs of a policy are hotplugged out, this pointer wouldn't be valid anymore. And if we try to read the 'scaling_governor', etc. from sysfs, it will result in kernel OOPs. To prevent this, mark policy->governor as NULL for all inactive policies while the governor is removed from kernel. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
History of which governor was used last is common to all CPUs within a policy and maintaining it per-cpu isn't the best approach for sure. Apart from wasting memory, this also increases the complexity of managing this data structure as it has to be updated for all CPUs. To make that somewhat simpler, lets store this information in a new field 'last_governor' in struct cpufreq_policy and update it on removal of last cpu of a policy. As a side-effect it also solves an old problem, consider a system with two clusters 0 & 1. And there is one policy per cluster. Cluster 0: CPU0 and 1. Cluster 1: CPU2 and 3. - CPU2 is first brought online, and governor is set to performance (default as cpufreq_cpu_governor wasn't set). - Governor is changed to ondemand. - CPU2 is taken offline and cpufreq_cpu_governor is updated for CPU2. - CPU3 is brought online. - Because cpufreq_cpu_governor wasn't set for CPU3, the default governor performance is picked for CPU3. This patch fixes the bug as we now have a single variable to update for policy. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
We reach here while adding policy for a CPU and enter into the 'if' block only if a policy already exists for the CPU. As cpufreq_cpu_data is set for all policy->related_cpus now, when the policy is first added, we can use that to find the CPU's policy instead of traversing the list of all active policies. Acked-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
We can extract the same information from cpufreq_cpu_data as it is also available for inactive policies now. And so don't need cpufreq_cpu_data_fallback anymore. Also add a WARN_ON() for the case where we try to restore from an active policy. Acked-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
Now that we can check policy->cpus to find if policy is active or not, we don't need to clean cpufreq_cpu_data and delete policy from the list on light weight tear down of policies (like in suspend). To make it consistent and clean, set cpufreq_cpu_data for all related CPUs when the policy is first created and clean it only while it is freed. Also update cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() to check if cpu is part of policy->cpus mask, so that we don't end up getting policies for offline CPUs. In order to make sure that no users of 'policy' are using an inactive policy, use cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() instead of directly accessing cpufreq_cpu_data. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
policy->cpus is cleared unconditionally now on hotplug-out of a CPU and it can be checked to know if a policy is active or not. Create helper routines to iterate over all active/inactive policies, based on policy->cpus field. Replace all instances of for_each_policy() with for_each_active_policy() to make them iterate only for active policies. (We haven't made changes yet to keep inactive policies in the same list, but that will be followed in a later patch). Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 08 5月, 2015 5 次提交
-
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
We clear policy->cpus mask while CPUs are hotplugged out. We do it for all CPUs except the last CPU of the policy. I don't remember what the rationale behind that was, but I couldn't think of anything that will break if we remove this conditional clearing and always clear policy->cpus. The benefit we get out of it is, we can know if a policy is active or not by checking if this field is empty or not. That will be used by later commits. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
There are two cases when we may try to add CPUs we're already handling: - On boot, the first cpu has marked all policy->cpus managed and so we will find policy for all other policy->cpus later on. - When a managed cpu is hotplugged out and later brought back in. Currently, separate paths and checks take care of the two. While the first one is detected by testing cpu against 'policy->cpus', the other one is detected by testing cpu against 'policy->related_cpus'. We can handle them both via a single path and there is no need to do special checking for the first one. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> [ rjw: Changelog, comments ] Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
Simply returning here with an error is not enough. It shouldn't be allowed at all to try calling cpufreq_cpu_get() for an invalid CPU. Add a WARN here to make it clear that it wouldn't be acceptable at all. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
cpufreq_add_dev() is an unnecessary wrapper over __cpufreq_add_dev(). Merge them. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
This clearly states what the code inside these routines is doing and how these must be used. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 03 4月, 2015 1 次提交
-
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
All CPUs leaving the first-online CPU are hotplugged out on suspend and and cpufreq core stops managing them. On resume, we need to call cpufreq_update_policy() for this CPU's policy to make sure its frequency is in sync with cpufreq's cached value, as it might have got updated by hardware during suspend/resume. The policies are always added to the top of the policy-list. So, in normal circumstances, CPU 0's policy will be the last one in the list. And so the code checks for the last policy. But there are cases where it will fail. Consider quad-core system, with policy-per core. If CPU0 is hotplugged out and added back again, the last policy will be on CPU1 :( To fix this in a proper way, always look for the policy of the first online CPU. That way we will be sure that we are calling cpufreq_update_policy() for the only CPU that wasn't hotplugged out. Cc: 3.15+ <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.15+ Fixes: 2f0aea93 ("cpufreq: suspend governors on system suspend/hibernate") Reported-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 04 2月, 2015 3 次提交
-
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
To make code more readable and less error prone, lets create a helper macro for iterating over all available governors. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
To make code more readable and less error prone, lets create a helper macro for iterating over all active policies. Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
When cpufreq is disabled, the per-cpu variable would have been set to NULL. Remove this unnecessary check. [ Changelog from Saravana Kannan. ] Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Acked-by: NSaravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org> Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-
- 03 2月, 2015 1 次提交
-
-
由 Viresh Kumar 提交于
In __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish(), per-cpu 'cpufreq_cpu_data' needs to be cleared before calling kobject_put(&policy->kobj) and under cpufreq_driver_lock. Otherwise, if someone else calls cpufreq_cpu_get() in parallel with it, they can obtain a non-NULL policy from that after kobject_put(&policy->kobj) was executed. Consider this case: Thread A Thread B cpufreq_cpu_get() acquire cpufreq_driver_lock read-per-cpu cpufreq_cpu_data kobject_put(&policy->kobj); kobject_get(&policy->kobj); ... per_cpu(&cpufreq_cpu_data, cpu) = NULL And this will result in a warning like this one: ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 4 at include/linux/kref.h:47 kobject_get+0x41/0x50() Modules linked in: acpi_cpufreq(+) nfsd auth_rpcgss nfs_acl lockd grace sunrpc xfs libcrc32c sd_mod ixgbe igb mdio ahci hwmon ... Call Trace: [<ffffffff81661b14>] dump_stack+0x46/0x58 [<ffffffff81072b61>] warn_slowpath_common+0x81/0xa0 [<ffffffff81072c7a>] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20 [<ffffffff812e16d1>] kobject_get+0x41/0x50 [<ffffffff815262a5>] cpufreq_cpu_get+0x75/0xc0 [<ffffffff81527c3e>] cpufreq_update_policy+0x2e/0x1f0 [<ffffffff810b8cb2>] ? up+0x32/0x50 [<ffffffff81381aa9>] ? acpi_ns_get_node+0xcb/0xf2 [<ffffffff81381efd>] ? acpi_evaluate_object+0x22c/0x252 [<ffffffff813824f6>] ? acpi_get_handle+0x95/0xc0 [<ffffffff81360967>] ? acpi_has_method+0x25/0x40 [<ffffffff81391e08>] acpi_processor_ppc_has_changed+0x77/0x82 [<ffffffff81089566>] ? move_linked_works+0x66/0x90 [<ffffffff8138e8ed>] acpi_processor_notify+0x58/0xe7 [<ffffffff8137410c>] acpi_ev_notify_dispatch+0x44/0x5c [<ffffffff8135f293>] acpi_os_execute_deferred+0x15/0x22 [<ffffffff8108c910>] process_one_work+0x160/0x410 [<ffffffff8108d05b>] worker_thread+0x11b/0x520 [<ffffffff8108cf40>] ? rescuer_thread+0x380/0x380 [<ffffffff81092421>] kthread+0xe1/0x100 [<ffffffff81092340>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x1b0/0x1b0 [<ffffffff81669ebc>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0 [<ffffffff81092340>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x1b0/0x1b0 ---[ end trace 89e66eb9795efdf7 ]--- The actual code flow is as follows: Thread A: Workqueue: kacpi_notify acpi_processor_notify() acpi_processor_ppc_has_changed() cpufreq_update_policy() cpufreq_cpu_get() kobject_get() Thread B: xenbus_thread() xenbus_thread() msg->u.watch.handle->callback() handle_vcpu_hotplug_event() vcpu_hotplug() cpu_down() __cpu_notify(CPU_POST_DEAD..) cpufreq_cpu_callback() __cpufreq_remove_dev_finish() cpufreq_policy_put_kobj() kobject_put() cpufreq_cpu_get() gets the policy from per-cpu variable cpufreq_cpu_data under cpufreq_driver_lock, and once it gets a valid policy it expects it to not be freed until cpufreq_cpu_put() is called. But the race happens when another thread puts the kobject first and updates cpufreq_cpu_data before or later. And so the first thread gets a valid policy structure and before it does kobject_get() on it, the second one has already done kobject_put(). Fix this by setting cpufreq_cpu_data to NULL before putting the kobject and that too under locks. Reported-by: NEthan Zhao <ethan.zhao@oracle.com> Reported-by: NSantosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Cc: 3.12+ <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.12+ Signed-off-by: NRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
-