Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1310257

Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor

From Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor
Date 2016-01-15 17:40 +0100
Message-ID <qRfzP-gk-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <qPOBH-5zs-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <qPOBK-5zs-53@gated-at.bofh.it> <qQ4ZQ-5t-29@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


Hi,

On 12/01/16 16:36, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 11-01-16, 17:35, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > Commit 6f1e4efd882e ("cpufreq: Fix timer/workqueue corruption by
> > protecting reading governor_enabled") made policy->governor_enabled
> > guarded by cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor. Now that
> > holding of policy->rwsem is asserted in __cpufreq_governor,
> > cpufreq_governor_mutex is overkilling.
> 
> I am sure that is going to break it. Try that x86, somehow I don't get
> it on my exynos boards.
> 

But governor_enabled seems to not be checked anymore outside cpufreq.c
(see also 01/19), as it was in the commit you are referring to. Now that
users of this should be holding policy->rwsem, so that should suffice
for protecting governor_enabled, as governor_enabled is only changed
inside here.

I run some test on a x86 box I setup and didn't see anything related to
this. I'll wait to get the first 0-day report anyway.

> > -	mutex_lock(&cpufreq_governor_mutex);
> >  	if ((policy->governor_enabled && event == CPUFREQ_GOV_START)
> >  	    || (!policy->governor_enabled
> >  	    && (event == CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS || event == CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP))) {
> > -		mutex_unlock(&cpufreq_governor_mutex);
> >  		return -EBUSY;
> >  	}
> 
> Actually the above checks should also be removed as the governors are
> responsible for maintaining their state machines. But
> userspace/powersave/performance don't have that support yet and so
> these checks save them from going into undefined states.
> 
> Over that, above and below checks are incomplete..
> 

You mean we need an additional patch that extends the checks performed?

Thanks,

- Juri

> > @@ -2006,8 +2004,6 @@ static int __cpufreq_governor(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  	else if (event == CPUFREQ_GOV_START)
> >  		policy->governor_enabled = true;
> >  
> > -	mutex_unlock(&cpufreq_governor_mutex);
> > -
> >  	ret = policy->governor->governor(policy, event);
> >  
> >  	if (!ret) {
> > @@ -2017,12 +2013,10 @@ static int __cpufreq_governor(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  			policy->governor->initialized--;
> >  	} else {
> >  		/* Restore original values */
> > -		mutex_lock(&cpufreq_governor_mutex);
> >  		if (event == CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP)
> >  			policy->governor_enabled = true;
> >  		else if (event == CPUFREQ_GOV_START)
> >  			policy->governor_enabled = false;
> > -		mutex_unlock(&cpufreq_governor_mutex);
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	if (((event == CPUFREQ_GOV_POLICY_INIT) && ret) ||
> > -- 
> > 2.2.2
> 
> -- 
> viresh
> 

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> - 2016-01-11 18:40 +0100
  Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of  cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-01-12 12:10 +0100
    Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of  cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> - 2016-01-15 17:40 +0100
      Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of  cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-01-18 07:00 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of  cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> - 2016-01-19 17:50 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of  cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-01-20 08:30 +0100
            Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of  cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-01-20 11:20 +0100
              Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of  cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> - 2016-01-20 11:30 +0100
                Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of  cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-01-20 11:40 +0100
            Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] cpufreq: remove useless usage of  cpufreq_governor_mutex in __cpufreq_governor Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> - 2016-01-20 11:20 +0100

csiph-web