lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:14:52 -0400
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>, stable@...nel.org,
	hidave.darkstar@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...k.pl, penberg@...helsinki.fi,
	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
	davej@...hat.com, mingo@...e.hu, kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [stable] [PATCH 1/2] CPUFREQ: Remove unneeded dbs_mutexes from
	ondemand and conservative governors

* Greg KH (greg@...ah.com) wrote:
> I don't see the patch below in Linus's tree.  If it's there, what is the
> git commit id?
> 

As I pointed out in an earlier reply, this patch is bogus and adds racy
data structure updates. It should not be merged.

Venkatesh is working on a proper fix.

Mathieu

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 04:01:24PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > Comment from Venkatesh:
> > ...
> > This mutex is just serializing the changes to those variables. I could't
> > think of any functionality issues of not having the lock as such.
> > 
> > -> rip it out.
> > 
> > CC: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>
> > ---
> >  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c |   61 +++-----------------------------
> >  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c     |   48 +++----------------------
> >  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> > index 7a74d17..6303379 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> > @@ -18,7 +18,6 @@
> >  #include <linux/cpu.h>
> >  #include <linux/jiffies.h>
> >  #include <linux/kernel_stat.h>
> > -#include <linux/mutex.h>
> >  #include <linux/hrtimer.h>
> >  #include <linux/tick.h>
> >  #include <linux/ktime.h>
> > @@ -84,19 +83,6 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cpu_dbs_info_s, cpu_dbs_info);
> >  
> >  static unsigned int dbs_enable;	/* number of CPUs using this policy */
> >  
> > -/*
> > - * DEADLOCK ALERT! There is a ordering requirement between cpu_hotplug
> > - * lock and dbs_mutex. cpu_hotplug lock should always be held before
> > - * dbs_mutex. If any function that can potentially take cpu_hotplug lock
> > - * (like __cpufreq_driver_target()) is being called with dbs_mutex taken, then
> > - * cpu_hotplug lock should be taken before that. Note that cpu_hotplug lock
> > - * is recursive for the same process. -Venki
> > - * DEADLOCK ALERT! (2) : do_dbs_timer() must not take the dbs_mutex, because it
> > - * would deadlock with cancel_delayed_work_sync(), which is needed for proper
> > - * raceless workqueue teardown.
> > - */
> > -static DEFINE_MUTEX(dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  static struct workqueue_struct	*kconservative_wq;
> >  
> >  static struct dbs_tuners {
> > @@ -236,10 +222,7 @@ static ssize_t store_sampling_down_factor(struct cpufreq_policy *unused,
> >  	if (ret != 1 || input > MAX_SAMPLING_DOWN_FACTOR || input < 1)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  
> > -	mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  	dbs_tuners_ins.sampling_down_factor = input;
> > -	mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  	return count;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -253,10 +236,7 @@ static ssize_t store_sampling_rate(struct cpufreq_policy *unused,
> >  	if (ret != 1)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  
> > -	mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  	dbs_tuners_ins.sampling_rate = max(input, minimum_sampling_rate());
> > -	mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  	return count;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -267,16 +247,11 @@ static ssize_t store_up_threshold(struct cpufreq_policy *unused,
> >  	int ret;
> >  	ret = sscanf(buf, "%u", &input);
> >  
> > -	mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  	if (ret != 1 || input > 100 ||
> > -			input <= dbs_tuners_ins.down_threshold) {
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > +			input <= dbs_tuners_ins.down_threshold)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> > -	}
> >  
> >  	dbs_tuners_ins.up_threshold = input;
> > -	mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  	return count;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -287,17 +262,12 @@ static ssize_t store_down_threshold(struct cpufreq_policy *unused,
> >  	int ret;
> >  	ret = sscanf(buf, "%u", &input);
> >  
> > -	mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  	/* cannot be lower than 11 otherwise freq will not fall */
> >  	if (ret != 1 || input < 11 || input > 100 ||
> > -			input >= dbs_tuners_ins.up_threshold) {
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > +			input >= dbs_tuners_ins.up_threshold)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> > -	}
> >  
> >  	dbs_tuners_ins.down_threshold = input;
> > -	mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  	return count;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -316,11 +286,9 @@ static ssize_t store_ignore_nice_load(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  	if (input > 1)
> >  		input = 1;
> >  
> > -	mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -	if (input == dbs_tuners_ins.ignore_nice) { /* nothing to do */
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > +	if (input == dbs_tuners_ins.ignore_nice) /* nothing to do */
> >  		return count;
> > -	}
> > +
> >  	dbs_tuners_ins.ignore_nice = input;
> >  
> >  	/* we need to re-evaluate prev_cpu_idle */
> > @@ -332,8 +300,6 @@ static ssize_t store_ignore_nice_load(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  		if (dbs_tuners_ins.ignore_nice)
> >  			dbs_info->prev_cpu_nice = kstat_cpu(j).cpustat.nice;
> >  	}
> > -	mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  	return count;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -352,10 +318,7 @@ static ssize_t store_freq_step(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  
> >  	/* no need to test here if freq_step is zero as the user might actually
> >  	 * want this, they would be crazy though :) */
> > -	mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  	dbs_tuners_ins.freq_step = input;
> > -	mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  	return count;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -566,13 +529,9 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  		if (this_dbs_info->enable) /* Already enabled */
> >  			break;
> >  
> > -		mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  		rc = sysfs_create_group(&policy->kobj, &dbs_attr_group);
> > -		if (rc) {
> > -			mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > +		if (rc)
> >  			return rc;
> > -		}
> >  
> >  		for_each_cpu(j, policy->cpus) {
> >  			struct cpu_dbs_info_s *j_dbs_info;
> > @@ -612,13 +571,9 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  					CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> >  		}
> >  		dbs_timer_init(this_dbs_info);
> > -
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  		break;
> >  
> >  	case CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> > -		mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  		dbs_timer_exit(this_dbs_info);
> >  		sysfs_remove_group(&policy->kobj, &dbs_attr_group);
> >  		dbs_enable--;
> > @@ -631,13 +586,9 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  			cpufreq_unregister_notifier(
> >  					&dbs_cpufreq_notifier_block,
> >  					CPUFREQ_TRANSITION_NOTIFIER);
> > -
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  		break;
> >  
> >  	case CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS:
> > -		mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  		if (policy->max < this_dbs_info->cur_policy->cur)
> >  			__cpufreq_driver_target(
> >  					this_dbs_info->cur_policy,
> > @@ -646,8 +597,6 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  			__cpufreq_driver_target(
> >  					this_dbs_info->cur_policy,
> >  					policy->min, CPUFREQ_RELATION_L);
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  		break;
> >  	}
> >  	return 0;
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
> > index e741c33..d080a48 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c
> > @@ -17,7 +17,6 @@
> >  #include <linux/cpu.h>
> >  #include <linux/jiffies.h>
> >  #include <linux/kernel_stat.h>
> > -#include <linux/mutex.h>
> >  #include <linux/hrtimer.h>
> >  #include <linux/tick.h>
> >  #include <linux/ktime.h>
> > @@ -91,19 +90,6 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cpu_dbs_info_s, cpu_dbs_info);
> >  
> >  static unsigned int dbs_enable;	/* number of CPUs using this policy */
> >  
> > -/*
> > - * DEADLOCK ALERT! There is a ordering requirement between cpu_hotplug
> > - * lock and dbs_mutex. cpu_hotplug lock should always be held before
> > - * dbs_mutex. If any function that can potentially take cpu_hotplug lock
> > - * (like __cpufreq_driver_target()) is being called with dbs_mutex taken, then
> > - * cpu_hotplug lock should be taken before that. Note that cpu_hotplug lock
> > - * is recursive for the same process. -Venki
> > - * DEADLOCK ALERT! (2) : do_dbs_timer() must not take the dbs_mutex, because it
> > - * would deadlock with cancel_delayed_work_sync(), which is needed for proper
> > - * raceless workqueue teardown.
> > - */
> > -static DEFINE_MUTEX(dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  static struct workqueue_struct	*kondemand_wq;
> >  
> >  static struct dbs_tuners {
> > @@ -269,14 +255,10 @@ static ssize_t store_sampling_rate(struct cpufreq_policy *unused,
> >  	int ret;
> >  	ret = sscanf(buf, "%u", &input);
> >  
> > -	mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -	if (ret != 1) {
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > +	if (ret != 1)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> > -	}
> > -	dbs_tuners_ins.sampling_rate = max(input, minimum_sampling_rate());
> > -	mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  
> > +	dbs_tuners_ins.sampling_rate = max(input, minimum_sampling_rate());
> >  	return count;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -287,16 +269,11 @@ static ssize_t store_up_threshold(struct cpufreq_policy *unused,
> >  	int ret;
> >  	ret = sscanf(buf, "%u", &input);
> >  
> > -	mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  	if (ret != 1 || input > MAX_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD ||
> > -			input < MIN_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD) {
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > +			input < MIN_FREQUENCY_UP_THRESHOLD)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> > -	}
> >  
> >  	dbs_tuners_ins.up_threshold = input;
> > -	mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  	return count;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -315,11 +292,9 @@ static ssize_t store_ignore_nice_load(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  	if (input > 1)
> >  		input = 1;
> >  
> > -	mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -	if (input == dbs_tuners_ins.ignore_nice) { /* nothing to do */
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > +	if (input == dbs_tuners_ins.ignore_nice) /* nothing to do */
> >  		return count;
> > -	}
> > +
> >  	dbs_tuners_ins.ignore_nice = input;
> >  
> >  	/* we need to re-evaluate prev_cpu_idle */
> > @@ -332,8 +307,6 @@ static ssize_t store_ignore_nice_load(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  			dbs_info->prev_cpu_nice = kstat_cpu(j).cpustat.nice;
> >  
> >  	}
> > -	mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  	return count;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -350,10 +323,8 @@ static ssize_t store_powersave_bias(struct cpufreq_policy *unused,
> >  	if (input > 1000)
> >  		input = 1000;
> >  
> > -	mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  	dbs_tuners_ins.powersave_bias = input;
> >  	ondemand_powersave_bias_init();
> > -	mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  
> >  	return count;
> >  }
> > @@ -586,13 +557,11 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  		if (this_dbs_info->enable) /* Already enabled */
> >  			break;
> >  
> > -		mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  		dbs_enable++;
> >  
> >  		rc = sysfs_create_group(&policy->kobj, &dbs_attr_group);
> >  		if (rc) {
> >  			dbs_enable--;
> > -			mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  			return rc;
> >  		}
> >  
> > @@ -627,28 +596,21 @@ static int cpufreq_governor_dbs(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> >  			dbs_tuners_ins.sampling_rate = def_sampling_rate;
> >  		}
> >  		dbs_timer_init(this_dbs_info);
> > -
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  		break;
> >  
> >  	case CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP:
> > -		mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  		dbs_timer_exit(this_dbs_info);
> >  		sysfs_remove_group(&policy->kobj, &dbs_attr_group);
> >  		dbs_enable--;
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> > -
> >  		break;
> >  
> >  	case CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS:
> > -		mutex_lock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  		if (policy->max < this_dbs_info->cur_policy->cur)
> >  			__cpufreq_driver_target(this_dbs_info->cur_policy,
> >  				policy->max, CPUFREQ_RELATION_H);
> >  		else if (policy->min > this_dbs_info->cur_policy->cur)
> >  			__cpufreq_driver_target(this_dbs_info->cur_policy,
> >  				policy->min, CPUFREQ_RELATION_L);
> > -		mutex_unlock(&dbs_mutex);
> >  		break;
> >  	}
> >  	return 0;
> > -- 
> > 1.6.0.2
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > stable mailing list
> > stable@...ux.kernel.org
> > http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ