[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <7ff45ca3-cf28-4a7c-aedf-3dcb51129a3d@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 21:03:57 -0500
From: "Mark Pearson" <mpearson-lenovo@...ebb.ca>
To: "Breno Leitao" <leitao@...ian.org>
Cc: "platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org"
<platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
"Hans de Goede" <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
ibm-acpi-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
"Limonciello, Mario" <mario.limonciello@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] platform/x86: Add support for improved performance mode
Hi Breno,
Thanks for the review!
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023, at 2:44 PM, Breno Leitao wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 11:54:33AM -0500, Mark Pearson wrote:
>> @@ -10355,6 +10361,17 @@ static int dytc_profile_set(struct platform_profile_handler *pprof,
>> if (err)
>> goto unlock;
>>
>> + /* Set TMS mode appropriately (enable for performance), if available */
>> + if (dytc_ultraperf_cap) {
>> + int cmd;
>> +
>> + cmd = DYTC_SET_COMMAND(DYTC_FUNCTION_TMS, DYTC_NOMODE,
>> + profile == PLATFORM_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE);
>> + err = dytc_command(cmd, &output);
>> + if (err)
>> + return err;
>
> Aren't you returning holding the 'dytc_mutex' mutex?
>
> From what I understand, in the first line of this function you get the lock,
> and release later, at the exit, so, returning without releasing the lock might
> be dangerous. Here is a summary of how I read this function with your change:
>
>
> mutex_lock_interruptible(&dytc_mutex);
> ...
> err = dytc_command(cmd, &output);
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> unlock:
> mutex_unlock(&dytc_mutex);
> return err;
>
>
> I think "goto unlock" might solve it.
Yep - you're right. Good catch.
Will fix in the next revision.
Thank you
Mark
Powered by blists - more mailing lists