[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0hYskLTjSGOJgRRXD0cE0a5DMHh5qTvmgCmJh8bMicLzA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 12:42:18 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Fix get_cpu_device() failed in add_cpu_dev_symlink()
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 10:10 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On 29-11-21, 16:02, Xiongfeng Wang wrote:
> > When I hot added a CPU, I found 'cpufreq' directory is not created below
> > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/. It is because get_cpu_device() failed in
> > add_cpu_dev_symlink().
> >
> > cpufreq_add_dev() is the .add_dev callback of a CPU subsys interface. It
> > will be called when the CPU device registered into the system. The stack
> > is as follows.
> > register_cpu()
> > ->device_register()
> > ->device_add()
> > ->bus_probe_device()
> > ->cpufreq_add_dev()
> >
> > But only after the CPU device has been registered, we can get the CPU
> > device by get_cpu_device(), otherwise it will return NULL. Since we
> > already have the CPU device in cpufreq_add_dev(), pass it to
> > add_cpu_dev_symlink(). I noticed that the 'kobj' of the cpu device has
> > been added into the system before cpufreq_add_dev().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 9 ++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > index e338d2f010fe..22aa2793e4d2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> > @@ -1004,10 +1004,9 @@ static struct kobj_type ktype_cpufreq = {
> > .release = cpufreq_sysfs_release,
> > };
> >
> > -static void add_cpu_dev_symlink(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu)
> > +static void add_cpu_dev_symlink(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu,
> > + struct device *dev)
> > {
> > - struct device *dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> > -
> > if (unlikely(!dev))
> > return;
> >
> > @@ -1391,7 +1390,7 @@ static int cpufreq_online(unsigned int cpu)
> > if (new_policy) {
> > for_each_cpu(j, policy->related_cpus) {
> > per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data, j) = policy;
> > - add_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, j);
> > + add_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, j, get_cpu_device(j));
> > }
> >
> > policy->min_freq_req = kzalloc(2 * sizeof(*policy->min_freq_req),
> > @@ -1565,7 +1564,7 @@ static int cpufreq_add_dev(struct device *dev, struct subsys_interface *sif)
> > /* Create sysfs link on CPU registration */
> > policy = per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data, cpu);
> > if (policy)
> > - add_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, cpu);
> > + add_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, cpu, dev);
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
>
> Interesting that I never hit it earlier despite doing rigorous testing of
> hotplug stuff :(
This is the real hot-add path which isn't tested on a regular basis.
> Anyway the patch is okay,
It would be good to add a Fixes: tag to it, though. Any idea about
the commit this should point to?
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists