Commit 8efd5765 authored by Viresh Kumar's avatar Viresh Kumar Committed by Rafael J. Wysocki

cpufreq: unlock correct rwsem while updating policy->cpu

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 release the same lock as was taken earlier. Also
update_policy_cpu() was also called from cpufreq_add_dev() without any locks and
so its better if we move this locking to inside update_policy_cpu().

This patch fixes a regression introduced in 3.12 by commit f9ba680d
(cpufreq: Extract the handover of policy cpu to a helper function).

Reported-and-tested-by: Jon Medhurst<tixy@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarViresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
parent 9c8f1ee4
...@@ -952,9 +952,20 @@ static void update_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu) ...@@ -952,9 +952,20 @@ static void update_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu)
if (cpu == policy->cpu) if (cpu == policy->cpu)
return; return;
/*
* Take direct locks as lock_policy_rwsem_write wouldn't work here.
* Also lock for last cpu is enough here as contention will happen only
* after policy->cpu is changed and after it is changed, other threads
* will try to acquire lock for new cpu. And policy is already updated
* by then.
*/
down_write(&per_cpu(cpu_policy_rwsem, policy->cpu));
policy->last_cpu = policy->cpu; policy->last_cpu = policy->cpu;
policy->cpu = cpu; policy->cpu = cpu;
up_write(&per_cpu(cpu_policy_rwsem, policy->last_cpu));
#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_TABLE #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_TABLE
cpufreq_frequency_table_update_policy_cpu(policy); cpufreq_frequency_table_update_policy_cpu(policy);
#endif #endif
...@@ -1200,9 +1211,7 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(struct device *dev, ...@@ -1200,9 +1211,7 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare(struct device *dev,
new_cpu = cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu(policy, cpu, frozen); new_cpu = cpufreq_nominate_new_policy_cpu(policy, cpu, frozen);
if (new_cpu >= 0) { if (new_cpu >= 0) {
WARN_ON(lock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu));
update_policy_cpu(policy, new_cpu); update_policy_cpu(policy, new_cpu);
unlock_policy_rwsem_write(cpu);
if (!frozen) { if (!frozen) {
pr_debug("%s: policy Kobject moved to cpu: %d " pr_debug("%s: policy Kobject moved to cpu: %d "
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment