linux-kernel - [PATCH v4 06/18] PM: EM: Check if the get_cost() callback is present in em_compute

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]

Message-Id: <20230925081139.1305766-7-lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 Sep 2023 09:11:27 +0100
From:   Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        rafael@...nel.org
Cc:     lukasz.luba@....com, dietmar.eggemann@....com, rui.zhang@...el.com,
        amit.kucheria@...durent.com, amit.kachhap@...il.com,
        daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
        len.brown@...el.com, pavel@....cz, mhiramat@...nel.org,
        qyousef@...alina.io, wvw@...gle.com
Subject: [PATCH v4 06/18] PM: EM: Check if the get_cost() callback is present in em_compute_costs()

The em_compute_cost() is going to be re-used in runtime modified EM
code path. Thus, make sure that this common code is safe and won't
try to use the NULL pointer. The former em_compute_cost() didn't have to
care about runtime modification code path. The upcoming changes introduce
such option, but with different callback. Those two paths which use
get_cost() (during first EM registration) or update_power() (during
runtime modification) need to be safely handled in em_compute_costs().

Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
---
 kernel/power/energy_model.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/power/energy_model.c b/kernel/power/energy_model.c
index 7ea882401833..35e07933b34a 100644
--- a/kernel/power/energy_model.c
+++ b/kernel/power/energy_model.c
@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ static int em_compute_costs(struct device *dev, struct em_perf_state *table,
 	for (i = nr_states - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
 		unsigned long power_res, cost;
 
-		if (flags & EM_PERF_DOMAIN_ARTIFICIAL) {
+		if (flags & EM_PERF_DOMAIN_ARTIFICIAL && cb->get_cost) {
 			ret = cb->get_cost(dev, table[i].frequency, &cost);
 			if (ret || !cost || cost > EM_MAX_POWER) {
 				dev_err(dev, "EM: invalid cost %lu %d\n",
-- 
2.25.1