linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] drivers base/arch_topology: frequency-invariant load-tracking support

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]

Message-ID: <20170615082810.mhdjklnshxt3azcb@e106622-lin>
Date:   Thu, 15 Jun 2017 09:28:10 +0100
From:   Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
To:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc:     Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
        LAK <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] drivers base/arch_topology: frequency-invariant
 load-tracking support

Hi,

On 14/06/17 15:08, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 14 June 2017 at 09:55, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com> wrote:
> >
> > On 06/12/2017 04:27 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On 8 June 2017 at 09:55, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Vincent,
> >
> > Thanks for the review!
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > >> @@ -225,8 +265,14 @@ static int __init register_cpufreq_notifier(void)
> > >>
> > >>          cpumask_copy(cpus_to_visit, cpu_possible_mask);
> > >>
> > >> -       return cpufreq_register_notifier(&init_cpu_capacity_notifier,
> > >> -                                        CPUFREQ_POLICY_NOTIFIER);
> > >> +       ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&init_cpu_capacity_notifier,
> > >> +                                       CPUFREQ_POLICY_NOTIFIER);
> > >> +
> > >> +       if (ret)
> > >
> > > Don't you have to free memory allocated for cpus_to_visit in case of
> > > errot ? it was not done before your patch as well
> >
> > Yes, we should free cpus_to_visit if the policy notifier registration
> > fails. But IMHO also, once the parsing of the capacity-dmips-mhz property
> > is done. free cpus_to_visit is only used in the notifier call
> > init_cpu_capacity_callback() after being allocated and initialized in
> > register_cpufreq_notifier().
> >
> > We could add something like this as the first patch of this set. Only
> > mildly tested on Juno. Juri, what do you think?
> >
> > Author: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
> > Date:   Tue Jun 13 23:21:59 2017 +0100
> >
> >     drivers base/arch_topology: free cpumask cpus_to_visit
> >
> >     Free cpumask cpus_to_visit in case registering
> >     init_cpu_capacity_notifier has failed or the parsing of the cpu
> >     capacity-dmips-mhz property is done. The cpumask cpus_to_visit is
> >     only used inside the notifier call init_cpu_capacity_callback.
> >
> >     Reported-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
> >     Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
> 
> your proposal for freeing cpus_to_visit looks good for me
> 
> Acked-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
> 

Yep, looks good to me too. Thanks for fixing!

Best,

- Juri