linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: flush any pending policy update work scheduled before freeing

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20191021105559.fqmf3pcvxxeh2ote@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Mon, 21 Oct 2019 16:25:59 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: flush any pending policy update work scheduled
 before freeing

On 21-10-19, 11:27, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> I just tested now with today's linux-pm/bleeding-edge branch.
> And even if I move cancel_work_sync just after freq_qos_remove_notifier,
> it works fine now. It was not the case on Friday.
> 
> Is that what you wanted to check or something else ?
> 
> Regards,
> Sudeep
> 
> -->8
> 
> diff --git i/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c w/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 829a3764df1b..48a224a6b178 100644
> --- i/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ w/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -1268,6 +1268,9 @@ static void cpufreq_policy_free(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>         freq_qos_remove_notifier(&policy->constraints, FREQ_QOS_MIN,
>                                  &policy->nb_min);
> 
> +       /* Cancel any pending policy->update work before freeing the policy. */
> +       cancel_work_sync(&policy->update);
> +
>         if (policy->max_freq_req) {
>                 /*
>                  * CPUFREQ_CREATE_POLICY notification is sent only after
> @@ -1279,8 +1282,6 @@ static void cpufreq_policy_free(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>         }
> 
>         freq_qos_remove_request(policy->min_freq_req);
> -       /* Cancel any pending policy->update work before freeing the policy. */
> -       cancel_work_sync(&policy->update);
>         kfree(policy->min_freq_req);
> 
>         cpufreq_policy_put_kobj(policy);

Yes, send a incremental patch for that. Thanks.

-- 
viresh