All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH V2 5/5] cpufreq: Avoid calling cpufreq_verify_current_freq() from handle_update()
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 08:35:50 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ea598384a9ba18e20b598863ce339a55093be5f6.1560999838.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1560999838.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

On some occasions cpufreq_verify_current_freq() schedules a work whose
callback is handle_update(), which further calls cpufreq_update_policy()
which may end up calling cpufreq_verify_current_freq() again.

On the other hand, when cpufreq_update_policy() is called from
handle_update(), the pointer to the cpufreq policy is already available
but we still call cpufreq_cpu_acquire() to get it in
cpufreq_update_policy(), which should be avoided as well.

Fix both the issues by creating another helper
reeval_frequency_limits().

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index 4556a53fc764..0a73de7aae54 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -1115,13 +1115,25 @@ static int cpufreq_add_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cp
 	return ret;
 }
 
+static void reeval_frequency_limits(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
+{
+	struct cpufreq_policy new_policy = *policy;
+
+	pr_debug("updating policy for CPU %u\n", policy->cpu);
+
+	new_policy.min = policy->user_policy.min;
+	new_policy.max = policy->user_policy.max;
+
+	cpufreq_set_policy(policy, &new_policy);
+}
+
 static void handle_update(struct work_struct *work)
 {
 	struct cpufreq_policy *policy =
 		container_of(work, struct cpufreq_policy, update);
-	unsigned int cpu = policy->cpu;
-	pr_debug("handle_update for cpu %u called\n", cpu);
-	cpufreq_update_policy(cpu);
+
+	pr_debug("handle_update for cpu %u called\n", policy->cpu);
+	reeval_frequency_limits(policy);
 }
 
 static struct cpufreq_policy *cpufreq_policy_alloc(unsigned int cpu)
@@ -2378,7 +2390,6 @@ int cpufreq_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
 void cpufreq_update_policy(unsigned int cpu)
 {
 	struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_acquire(cpu);
-	struct cpufreq_policy new_policy;
 
 	if (!policy)
 		return;
@@ -2391,12 +2402,7 @@ void cpufreq_update_policy(unsigned int cpu)
 	    (cpufreq_suspended || WARN_ON(!cpufreq_verify_current_freq(policy, false))))
 		goto unlock;
 
-	pr_debug("updating policy for CPU %u\n", cpu);
-	memcpy(&new_policy, policy, sizeof(*policy));
-	new_policy.min = policy->user_policy.min;
-	new_policy.max = policy->user_policy.max;
-
-	cpufreq_set_policy(policy, &new_policy);
+	reeval_frequency_limits(policy);
 
 unlock:
 	cpufreq_cpu_release(policy);
-- 
2.21.0.rc0.269.g1a574e7a288b


      parent reply	other threads:[~2019-06-20  3:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-20  3:05 [PATCH V2 0/5] cpufreq: cleanups Viresh Kumar
2019-06-20  3:05 ` [PATCH V2 1/5] cpufreq: Remove the redundant !setpolicy check Viresh Kumar
2019-06-27 21:52   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-06-20  3:05 ` [PATCH V2 2/5] cpufreq: Replace few CPUFREQ_CONST_LOOPS checks with has_target() Viresh Kumar
2019-06-27  5:00   ` Viresh Kumar
2019-06-27  9:52     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-06-28  5:16   ` [PATCH V3 2/5] cpufreq: Don't skip frequency validation for has_target() drivers Viresh Kumar
2019-06-20  3:05 ` [PATCH V2 3/5] cpufreq: Use has_target() instead of !setpolicy Viresh Kumar
2019-06-27 21:52   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-06-20  3:05 ` [PATCH V2 4/5] cpufreq: Reuse cpufreq_update_current_freq() in __cpufreq_get() Viresh Kumar
2019-06-20  3:05 ` Viresh Kumar [this message]

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=ea598384a9ba18e20b598863ce339a55093be5f6.1560999838.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --to=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.