linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, Viresh Kumar <vireshk@kernel.org>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] opp: Reinitialize the list_kref before adding the static OPPs again
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 07:55:16 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191021022516.gecunkpahu7okvm5@vireshk-i7> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191018211214.444D32089C@mail.kernel.org>

On 18-10-19, 14:12, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Viresh Kumar (2019-10-18 02:28:41)
> > The list_kref reaches a count of 0 when all the static OPPs are removed,
> > for example when dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_remove_table() is called, though
> > the actual OPP table may not get freed as it may still be referenced by
> > other parts of the kernel, like from a call to
> > dev_pm_opp_set_supported_hw(). And if we call
> > dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_add_table() again at this point, we must
> > reinitialize the list_kref otherwise the kernel will hit a WARN() in
> > kref infrastructure for incrementing a kref with value 0.
> > 
> > Fixes: 11e1a1648298 ("opp: Don't decrement uninitialized list_kref")
> > Reported-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/opp/of.c | 7 +++++++
> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/opp/of.c b/drivers/opp/of.c
> > index 6dc41faf74b5..1cbb58240b80 100644
> > --- a/drivers/opp/of.c
> > +++ b/drivers/opp/of.c
> > @@ -663,6 +663,13 @@ static int _of_add_opp_table_v2(struct device *dev, struct opp_table *opp_table)
> >                 return 0;
> >         }
> >  
> > +       /*
> > +        * Re-initialize list_kref every time we add static OPPs to the OPP
> > +        * table as the reference count may be 0 after the last tie static OPPs
> 
> s/tie/time/
> 
> > +        * were removed.
> > +        */
> > +       kref_init(&opp_table->list_kref);
> 
> It seems racy.

I am not sure if I see a race here, but maybe I am missing something.
Care to explain ?

> Why are we doing this vs. making an entirely new and
> different OPP structure? Or why is the count reaching 0 when something
> is obviously still referencing it?

The kref for the opp table is opp_table->kref and the one here is
different. This is list_kref which is used for freeing OPPs added
statically from the DT. The static OPPs get added to the OPP table
when one calls dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_add_table() and must be removed
on a call to dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_remove_table(). The opp table
structure may not get freed at this moment though as it is still
referenced by the caller of dev_pm_opp_set_supported_hw().

And now when we try to add the static OPPs again (re-insertion of
cpufreq module), we need to reinitialize the list_kref again as its
count reached 0 earlier and the resources (static OPPs) were freed.

-- 
viresh

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-21  2:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-18  9:28 [PATCH] opp: Reinitialize the list_kref before adding the static OPPs again Viresh Kumar
2019-10-18 15:35 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2019-10-21  2:18   ` Viresh Kumar
2019-10-18 21:12 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-10-21  2:25   ` Viresh Kumar [this message]
2019-10-28 12:01     ` Stephen Boyd
2019-10-30  7:50       ` Viresh Kumar
     [not found]         ` <20191030143400.1680D20656@mail.kernel.org>
2019-11-11  8:21           ` Viresh Kumar
2019-11-11 11:31             ` Viresh Kumar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191021022516.gecunkpahu7okvm5@vireshk-i7 \
    --to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=digetx@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nm@ti.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vireshk@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).