linux-kernel - [PATCH 5.8 083/255] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Fix EPP setting via sysfs in active mode

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:   Tue,  1 Sep 2020 17:08:59 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Francisco Jerez <currojerez@...eup.net>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.8 083/255] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Fix EPP setting via sysfs in active mode

From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>

[ Upstream commit de002c55cadfc2f6cdf0ed427526f6085d240238 ]

Because intel_pstate_set_energy_pref_index() reads and writes the
MSR_HWP_REQUEST register without using the cached value of it used by
intel_pstate_hwp_boost_up() and intel_pstate_hwp_boost_down(), those
functions may overwrite the value written by it and so the EPP value
set via sysfs may be lost.

To avoid that, make intel_pstate_set_energy_pref_index() take the
cached value of MSR_HWP_REQUEST just like the other two routines
mentioned above and update it with the new EPP value coming from
user space in addition to updating the MSR.

Note that the MSR itself still needs to be updated too in case
hwp_boost is unset or the boosting mechanism is not active at the
EPP change time.

Fixes: e0efd5be63e8 ("cpufreq: intel_pstate: Add HWP boost utility and sched util hooks")
Reported-by: Francisco Jerez <currojerez@...eup.net>
Cc: 4.18+ <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 4.18+: 3da97d4db8ee cpufreq: intel_pstate: Rearrange ...
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Reviewed-by: Francisco Jerez <currojerez@...eup.net>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
index c7540ad28995b..8c730a47e0537 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
@@ -649,11 +649,12 @@ static int intel_pstate_set_energy_pref_index(struct cpudata *cpu_data,
 	mutex_lock(&intel_pstate_limits_lock);
 
 	if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HWP_EPP)) {
-		u64 value;
-
-		ret = rdmsrl_on_cpu(cpu_data->cpu, MSR_HWP_REQUEST, &value);
-		if (ret)
-			goto return_pref;
+		/*
+		 * Use the cached HWP Request MSR value, because the register
+		 * itself may be updated by intel_pstate_hwp_boost_up() or
+		 * intel_pstate_hwp_boost_down() at any time.
+		 */
+		u64 value = READ_ONCE(cpu_data->hwp_req_cached);
 
 		value &= ~GENMASK_ULL(31, 24);
 
@@ -661,13 +662,18 @@ static int intel_pstate_set_energy_pref_index(struct cpudata *cpu_data,
 			epp = epp_values[pref_index - 1];
 
 		value |= (u64)epp << 24;
+		/*
+		 * The only other updater of hwp_req_cached in the active mode,
+		 * intel_pstate_hwp_set(), is called under the same lock as this
+		 * function, so it cannot run in parallel with the update below.
+		 */
+		WRITE_ONCE(cpu_data->hwp_req_cached, value);
 		ret = wrmsrl_on_cpu(cpu_data->cpu, MSR_HWP_REQUEST, value);
 	} else {
 		if (epp == -EINVAL)
 			epp = (pref_index - 1) << 2;
 		ret = intel_pstate_set_epb(cpu_data->cpu, epp);
 	}
-return_pref:
 	mutex_unlock(&intel_pstate_limits_lock);
 
 	return ret;
-- 
2.25.1