Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.32 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.32;
Feedback-ID: ibe194615:Fastmail
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.9.0-alpha0-1234-gac66594aae-fm-20231122.001-gac66594a
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <7ff45ca3-cf28-4a7c-aedf-3dcb51129a3d@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20231122194453.GA497690@gmail.com>
References: <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
 <20231113165453.6335-1-mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
 <20231122194453.GA497690@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 22 Nov 2023 21:03:57 -0500
From:   "Mark Pearson" <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
To:     "Breno Leitao" <leitao@debian.org>
Cc:     "platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org" 
        <platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Hans de Goede" <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Ilpo_J=C3=A4rvinen?= <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>,
        ibm-acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
        "Limonciello, Mario" <mario.limonciello@amd.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] platform/x86: Add support for improved performance mode
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

Hi Breno,

Thanks for the review!

On Wed, Nov 22, 2023, at 2:44 PM, Breno Leitao wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 11:54:33AM -0500, Mark Pearson wrote:
>> @@ -10355,6 +10361,17 @@ static int dytc_profile_set(struct platform_profile_handler *pprof,
>>  	if (err)
>>  		goto unlock;
>>  
>> +	/* Set TMS mode appropriately (enable for performance), if available */
>> +	if (dytc_ultraperf_cap) {
>> +		int cmd;
>> +
>> +		cmd = DYTC_SET_COMMAND(DYTC_FUNCTION_TMS, DYTC_NOMODE,
>> +				       profile == PLATFORM_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE);
>> +		err = dytc_command(cmd, &output);
>> +		if (err)
>> +			return err;
>
> Aren't you returning holding the 'dytc_mutex' mutex?
>
> From what I understand, in the first line of this function you get the lock,
> and release later, at the exit, so, returning without releasing the lock might
> be dangerous. Here is a summary of how I read this function with your change:
>
>
> 	mutex_lock_interruptible(&dytc_mutex);
> 	...
> 	err = dytc_command(cmd, &output);
> 	if (err)
> 		return err;
>
> unlock:
> 	mutex_unlock(&dytc_mutex);
> 	return err;
>
>
> I think "goto unlock" might solve it.

Yep - you're right. Good catch. 
Will fix in the next revision.

Thank you
Mark