linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] interconnect: qcom: icc-rpm: Don't call __qcom_icc

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:   Fri, 3 Mar 2023 11:35:00 +0000
From:   Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, andersson@...nel.org,
        agross@...nel.org
Cc:     marijn.suijten@...ainline.org, Georgi Djakov <djakov@...nel.org>,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] interconnect: qcom: icc-rpm: Don't call
 __qcom_icc_set twice on the same node

On 03/03/2023 11:33, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3.03.2023 12:32, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
>> On 03/03/2023 02:35, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> Currently, when sync_state calls set(n, n) all the paths for setting
>>> parameters on an icc node are called twice. Avoid that.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 751f4d14cdb4 ("interconnect: icc-rpm: Set destination bandwidth as well as source bandwidth")
>>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>> RFC comes from the fact that I *believe* this should be correct, but I'm
>>> not entirely sure about it..
>>>
>>>
>>>    drivers/interconnect/qcom/icc-rpm.c | 2 +-
>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/interconnect/qcom/icc-rpm.c b/drivers/interconnect/qcom/icc-rpm.c
>>> index a6e0de03f46b..d35db1af9b08 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/interconnect/qcom/icc-rpm.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/interconnect/qcom/icc-rpm.c
>>> @@ -387,7 +387,7 @@ static int qcom_icc_set(struct icc_node *src, struct icc_node *dst)
>>>        ret = __qcom_icc_set(src, src_qn, sum_bw);
>>>        if (ret)
>>>            return ret;
>>> -    if (dst_qn) {
>>> +    if (dst_qn && src_qn != dst_qn) {
>>>            ret = __qcom_icc_set(dst, dst_qn, sum_bw);
>>>            if (ret)
>>>                return ret;
>>
>> Is it possible for src_qn == dst_qn ?
> As the commit message says, sync_state calls set(n, n) in
> drivers/interconnect/core.c : icc_sync_state(struct device *dev)

So you've _seen_ that happen ?