linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
To: Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	<linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: [PATCH v3] cpufreq: powernv: fix stack bloat and hard limit on num cpus
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 22:21:59 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191031052159.4125031-1-jhubbard@nvidia.com> (raw)

The following build warning occurred on powerpc 64-bit builds:

drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c: In function 'init_chip_info':
drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c:1070:1: warning: the frame size of
1040 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=]

This is with a cross-compiler based on gcc 8.1.0, which I got from:
  https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/files/bin/x86_64/8.1.0/

The warning is due to putting 1024 bytes on the stack:

    unsigned int chip[256];

...and it's also undesirable to have a hard limit on the number of
CPUs here.

Fix both problems by dynamically allocating based on num_possible_cpus,
as recommended by Michael Ellerman.

Fixes: 053819e0bf840 ("cpufreq: powernv: Handle throttling due to Pmax capping at chip level")
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
---

Changes since v2: applied fixes from Michael Ellerman's review:

* Changed from CONFIG_NR_CPUS to num_possible_cpus()

* Fixed up commit description: added a note about exactly which
  compiler generates the warning. And softened up wording about
  the limitation on number of CPUs.

Changes since v1: includes Viresh's review commit fixes.

thanks,
John Hubbard
NVIDIA


 drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c | 17 +++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c
index 6061850e59c9..56f4bc0d209e 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c
@@ -1041,9 +1041,14 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver powernv_cpufreq_driver = {
 
 static int init_chip_info(void)
 {
-	unsigned int chip[256];
+	unsigned int *chip;
 	unsigned int cpu, i;
 	unsigned int prev_chip_id = UINT_MAX;
+	int ret = 0;
+
+	chip = kcalloc(num_possible_cpus(), sizeof(*chip), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!chip)
+		return -ENOMEM;
 
 	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
 		unsigned int id = cpu_to_chip_id(cpu);
@@ -1055,8 +1060,10 @@ static int init_chip_info(void)
 	}
 
 	chips = kcalloc(nr_chips, sizeof(struct chip), GFP_KERNEL);
-	if (!chips)
-		return -ENOMEM;
+	if (!chips) {
+		ret = -ENOMEM;
+		goto free_and_return;
+	}
 
 	for (i = 0; i < nr_chips; i++) {
 		chips[i].id = chip[i];
@@ -1066,7 +1073,9 @@ static int init_chip_info(void)
 			per_cpu(chip_info, cpu) =  &chips[i];
 	}
 
-	return 0;
+free_and_return:
+	kfree(chip);
+	return ret;
 }
 
 static inline void clean_chip_info(void)
-- 
2.23.0


             reply	other threads:[~2019-10-31  5:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-31  5:21 John Hubbard [this message]
2019-10-31  9:22 ` [PATCH v3] cpufreq: powernv: fix stack bloat and hard limit on num cpus Viresh Kumar
2019-11-04 11:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki

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=20191031052159.4125031-1-jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --to=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=shilpa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.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).