linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: scmi: Fix frequency invariance in slow path

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:   Wed, 09 Jan 2019 11:56:06 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
Cc:     sudeep.holla@....com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, qais.yousef@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: scmi: Fix frequency invariance in slow path

On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 11:45:11 AM CET Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 09-01-19, 10:42, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > The scmi-cpufreq driver calls the arch_set_freq_scale() callback on
> > frequency changes to provide scale-invariant load-tracking signals to
> > the scheduler. However, in the slow path, it does so while specifying
> > the current and max frequencies in different units, hence resulting in a
> > broken freq_scale factor.
> > 
> > Fix this by passing all frequencies in KHz, as stored in the CPUFreq
> > frequency table.
> > 
> > Fixes: 99d6bdf33877 ("cpufreq: add support for CPU DVFS based on SCMI
> > message protocol")
> > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> > index 50b1551ba894..3f0693439486 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> > @@ -52,9 +52,9 @@ scmi_cpufreq_set_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int index)
> >  	int ret;
> >  	struct scmi_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
> >  	struct scmi_perf_ops *perf_ops = handle->perf_ops;
> > -	u64 freq = policy->freq_table[index].frequency * 1000;
> > +	u64 freq = policy->freq_table[index].frequency;
> >  
> > -	ret = perf_ops->freq_set(handle, priv->domain_id, freq, false);
> > +	ret = perf_ops->freq_set(handle, priv->domain_id, freq * 1000, false);
> >  	if (!ret)
> >  		arch_set_freq_scale(policy->related_cpus, freq,
> >  				    policy->cpuinfo.max_freq);
> 
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>

This would be stable-candidate I guess?