From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] base/drivers/arch_topology: Remove useless check
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 14:35:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <318665ae-0852-1350-b43f-bbf929b1cb4f@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181030083308.5znognajpwjvdxfv@vireshk-i7>
On 30/10/2018 09:33, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 30-10-18, 08:55, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> The workqueue is called from init_cpu_capacity_callback(). This one is
>> called in the notifier callback. IOW the notification callback
>> unregisters itself. But if it is not registered, it won't unregister,
>> hence it won't call the workqueue and init_cpu_capacity_notifier() is
>> not called.
>
> Sorry, couldn't understand most of your reply :)
Logical, I didn't understand your initial comment :)
> Though let me try to explain the problem I was trying to show you..
>
> cpufreq-notifier-callback
> -> init_cpu_capacity_callback()
> -> free raw capacity
> -> queue_work() to unregister the notifier
> -> return
>
> ->init_cpu_capacity_callback() called again before work was processed.
> -> If we don't check raw_capacity, we may end up using
> NULL pointer, as the notifier isn't unregistered yet.
Oh, nice catch.
I'm wondering if having a statically per_cpu variable, even if it is not
free at the end, isn't worth regarding the twisted code we end up with
an allocation.
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-30 13:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-29 16:23 Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-29 16:23 ` [PATCH 2/4] base/drivers/arch_topology: Replace mutex with READ_ONCE / WRITE_ONCE Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-30 5:57 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-11-23 13:58 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-23 16:04 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-11-23 16:20 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-23 16:54 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-11-26 8:27 ` Juri Lelli
2018-11-26 8:39 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-11-26 11:33 ` Mark Brown
2018-10-29 16:23 ` [PATCH 3/4] base/drivers/topology: Move instructions in the error path Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-30 6:12 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-10-30 8:32 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-29 16:23 ` [PATCH 4/4] base/drivers/topology: Default dmpis-mhz if they are not set in DT Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-30 7:13 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-10-30 8:39 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-30 8:45 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-10-30 8:58 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-11-21 22:12 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-11-22 4:29 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-11-22 10:29 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-11-22 10:31 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-11-22 10:32 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-11-22 11:11 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-30 5:50 ` [PATCH 1/4] base/drivers/arch_topology: Remove useless check Viresh Kumar
2018-10-30 7:55 ` Daniel Lezcano
2018-10-30 8:33 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-10-30 13:35 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2018-10-31 4:27 ` Viresh Kumar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=318665ae-0852-1350-b43f-bbf929b1cb4f@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®