Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: unlock when failing cpufreq_update_policy()

From: Viresh Kumar
Date: Wed Jun 18 2014 - 03:40:47 EST


On 18 June 2014 05:42, Aaron Plattner <aplattner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Commit bd0fa9bb455d introduced a failure path to cpufreq_update_policy() if
> cpufreq_driver->get(cpu) returns NULL. However, it jumps to the 'no_policy'
> label, which exits without unlocking any of the locks the function acquired
> earlier. This causes later calls into cpufreq to hang.
>
> Fix this by creating a new 'unlock' label and jumping to that instead.
>
> Fixes: bd0fa9bb455d ("cpufreq: Return error if ->get() failed in cpufreq_update_policy()")
> Link: https://devtalk.nvidia.com/default/topic/751903/kernel-3-15-and-nv-drivers-337-340-failed-to-initialize-the-nvidia-kernel-module-gtx-550-ti-/
> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Aaron Plattner <aplattner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> I haven't reproduced this problem so I couldn't test it, but the bug and its
> solution seem obvious enough.
>
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index aed2b0cb83dc..5b6d04f3b9ea 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -2264,7 +2264,7 @@ int cpufreq_update_policy(unsigned int cpu)
> new_policy.cur = cpufreq_driver->get(cpu);
> if (WARN_ON(!new_policy.cur)) {
> ret = -EIO;
> - goto no_policy;
> + goto unlock;
> }
>
> if (!policy->cur) {
> @@ -2279,6 +2279,7 @@ int cpufreq_update_policy(unsigned int cpu)
>
> ret = cpufreq_set_policy(policy, &new_policy);
>
> +unlock:
> up_write(&policy->rwsem);
>
> cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);

Hmm, yes we do have a problem here but the code became a bit ugly
now.. Can you please consider this diff instead?

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index aed2b0c..6caced5 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -2242,10 +2242,8 @@ int cpufreq_update_policy(unsigned int cpu)
struct cpufreq_policy new_policy;
int ret;

- if (!policy) {
- ret = -ENODEV;
- goto no_policy;
- }
+ if (!policy)
+ return = -ENODEV;

down_write(&policy->rwsem);

@@ -2279,10 +2277,10 @@ int cpufreq_update_policy(unsigned int cpu)

ret = cpufreq_set_policy(policy, &new_policy);

+no_policy:
up_write(&policy->rwsem);

cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
-no_policy:
return ret;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpufreq_update_policy);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/