Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757120Ab3IPPKb (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:10:31 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com ([209.85.220.48]:32776 "EHLO mail-pa0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756477Ab3IPPK3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:10:29 -0400 From: Viresh Kumar To: rjw@sisk.pl, tixy@linaro.org Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Viresh Kumar Subject: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: unlock correct rwsem while updating policy->cpu Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 20:40:16 +0530 Message-Id: <075032be4fd288074b8f699d4f4ba0179518df6f.1379344038.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.12.rc2.18.g61b472e Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2320 Lines: 66 Current code looks like this: WARN_ON(lock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu)); update_policy_cpu(policy, new_cpu); unlock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu); {lock|unlock}_policy_rwsem_write(cpu) takes/releases policy->cpu's rwsem. Because cpu is changing with the call to update_policy_cpu(), the unlock_policy_rwsem_write() will release the incorrect lock. The right solution would be to take rwsem lock/unlock for both old and new cpu. This patch fixes this bug by taking both locks directly instead of calling lock_policy_rwsem_write(). Reported-by: Jon Medhurst Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar --- Hi Rafael, Probably we can get this patch in for 3.12? The second one can go in 3.13. These are compile tested only at my end. Tixy reported these and probably can give his tested-by once he is done testing them. drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c index 43c24aa..c18bf7b 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -952,9 +952,16 @@ static void update_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu) if (cpu == policy->cpu) return; + /* take direct locks as lock_policy_rwsem_write wouldn't work here */ + down_write(&per_cpu(cpu_policy_rwsem, policy->cpu)); + down_write(&per_cpu(cpu_policy_rwsem, cpu)); + policy->last_cpu = policy->cpu; policy->cpu = cpu; + up_write(&per_cpu(cpu_policy_rwsem, cpu)); + up_write(&per_cpu(cpu_policy_rwsem, policy->cpu)); + #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_TABLE cpufreq_frequency_table_update_policy_cpu(policy); #endif @@ -1203,9 +1210,7 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(struct device *dev, new_cpu = cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu(policy, cpu, frozen); if (new_cpu >= 0) { - WARN_ON(lock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu)); update_policy_cpu(policy, new_cpu); - unlock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu); if (!frozen) { pr_debug("%s: policy Kobject moved to cpu: %d " -- 1.7.12.rc2.18.g61b472e -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/