[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201003202148.01312.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 21:48:01 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Regression, post-2.6.34-rc1][PATCH] x86 / perf: Fix suspend to RAM on HP nx6325
On Saturday 20 March 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Sat, 20 Mar 2010, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > cpuhw = &per_cpu(cpu_hw_events, cpu);
> > + if (!cpuhw)
> > + return;
>
> How can an address-of expression be NULL?
>
> Yes, 'per_cpu()' is magic, but it shouldn't be possible to be _that_
> magic. It's rather against the whole C model.
Yeah.
A field in the object pointed to by it can be NULL, though.
The appended patch fixes the breakage for me too.
Rafael
---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: x86 / perf: Fix suspend to RAM on HP nx6325
Commit 3f6da3905398826d85731247e7fbcf53400c18bd
(perf: Rework and fix the arch CPU-hotplug hooks) broke suspend to
RAM on my HP nx6325 (and most likely on other AMD-based boxes too)
by allowing amd_pmu_cpu_offline() to be executed for CPUs that are
going offline as part of the suspend process. The problem is that
cpuhw->amd_nb may be NULL already when amd_pmu_cpu_offline() is called, so the
function should make sure it's not NULL before accessing the object pointed to
by it.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_amd.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_amd.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_amd.c
+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_amd.c
@@ -348,11 +348,15 @@ static void amd_pmu_cpu_offline(int cpu)
raw_spin_lock(&amd_nb_lock);
+ if (!cpuhw->amd_nb)
+ goto unlock;
+
if (--cpuhw->amd_nb->refcnt == 0)
kfree(cpuhw->amd_nb);
cpuhw->amd_nb = NULL;
+ unlock:
raw_spin_unlock(&amd_nb_lock);
}
--
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