Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210904053703.581297-1-srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
 <CAJZ5v0hQp8Hxf__tL22s0oOcTym5mx9tND34ijufTDE3_NSW6A@mail.gmail.com>
 <926ac4b9-1bb5-e96e-ded3-6461f7a215b7@kernel.dk> <b1d5b6daacef349eb6fcc23ce7264e4786d1d9f4.camel@linux.intel.com>
 <CAJZ5v0jaXnw0zjpnsb81Hauy4-ApuULfQaaLG10qqL67H-YTNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <8dc57921f157b154e4af2dba26ce697dc4d4fcc2.camel@linux.intel.com>
 <CAJZ5v0jLmziZZEqEk-D+b6jD7UUPmeb7MQW1ZptdHTk-2c9nMg@mail.gmail.com>
 <584a4fad09048e3ea0dbc3515b2e909b745177dd.camel@linux.intel.com>
 <CAJZ5v0iH3TacxX3gzBS5cah7SnmDWbmHz=WCujQJpmEggGhLhg@mail.gmail.com> <980bc41a8bedbd81c199a78ce9f2ab2ef7b9341f.camel@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <980bc41a8bedbd81c199a78ce9f2ab2ef7b9341f.camel@linux.intel.com>
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 7 Sep 2021 15:41:23 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0hLXuF8HXcW61TqiBxYnskkb-nkah=XzX2SH8EKGJB-RA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Fix for HWP interrupt before
 driver is ready
To:     Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 9:57 PM Srinivas Pandruvada
<srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2021-09-06 at 20:25 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 8:14 PM Srinivas Pandruvada
> > <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2021-09-06 at 19:54 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > >
> [...]
>
> > > >
> > > We are handling offline for other thermal interrupt sources from
> > > same
> > > interrupt in therm-throt.c, where we do similar in offline path (by
> > > TGLX). If cpufreq offline can cause such issue of changing CPU,
> >
> > This is not cpufreq offline, but intel_pstate_update_status() which
> > may be triggered via sysfs.  And again, the theoretically problematic
> > thing is dereferencing cpudata (which may be cleared by a remote CPU)
> > from the interrupt handler without protection.
>
> This will be a problem.
>
> >
> > > I can call intel_pstate_disable_hwp_interrupt() via override from
> > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/C/ident/thermal_throttle_offline
> > > after masking APIC interrupt.
> >
> > But why would using RCU be harder than this?
> I think, this will require all_cpu_data and cpu_data to be rcu
> protected. This needs to be well tested.
>
> I think better to revert the patch for the next release.

Done, thanks!