[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150602062724.GF10443@linux>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 11:57:24 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: rjw@...ysocki.net, ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, paulus@...ba.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, shilpa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] cpufreq/hotplug: Fix cpu-hotplug cpufreq race
conditions
On 02-06-15, 11:50, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
> CPU0 CPU1
>
> store* store*
>
> lock(policy 1) lock(policy 2)
> cpufreq_set_policy() cpufreq_set_policy()
> EXIT() :
> dbs-data->usage_count--
>
> INIT() EXIT()
When will INIT() follow EXIT() in set_policy() for the same governor ?
Maybe not, and so this sequence is hypothetical ?
> dbs_data exists dbs_data->usage_count -- = 0
> kfree(dbs_data)
> dbs-data->usage_count++
> *NULL dereference*
But even if this happens, it should be handled with
dbs_data->mutex_lock, which is used at other places already.
--
viresh
--
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