From: "Liao, Chang" <liaochang1@huawei.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: <rafael@kernel.org>, <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
<linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Fix the race condition while updating the transition_task of policy
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 16:29:02 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bcac1b3c-a2f7-7f18-4c2f-5cf27f4e89b5@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230828072347.ly23mbptu3yw4zkv@vireshk-i7>
Hi Viresh.
在 2023/8/28 15:23, Viresh Kumar 写道:
> On 26-08-23, 09:58, Liao Chang wrote:
>> The field 'transition_task' of policy structure is used to track the
>> task which is performing the frequency transition. Using this field to
>> print a warning once detect a case where the same task is calling
>> _begin() again before completing the preivous frequency transition via
>> the _end().
>>
>> However, there is a potential race condition in _end() and _begin() APIs
>> while updating the field 'transition_task' of policy, the scenario is
>> depicted below:
>>
>> Task A Task B
>>
>> /* 1st freq transition */
>> Invoke _begin() {
>> ...
>> ...
>> }
>> /* 2nd freq transition */
>> Invoke _begin() {
>> ... //waiting for A to
>> ... //clear
>> ... //transition_ongoing
>> ... //in _end() for
>> ... //the 1st transition
>> |
>> Change the frequency |
>> |
>> Invoke _end() { |
>> ... |
>> ... |
>> transition_ongoing = false; V
>> transition_ongoing = true;
>> transition_task = current;
>
> Task B here won't move ahead until "wake_up(&policy->transition_wait)"
> is called, isn't it ?
Task B does not necessarily go to sleep when it calls wait_event(), it depends on
the condition to wait for evaluate false or not. So there is a small race window
where Task A already set 'transition_ongoing' to false and Task B can cross wait_event()
immediately.
wait_event:
do {
might_sleep();
if (condition) // !transition_ongoing
break;
__wait_event();
};
I hope I do not miss something important in the code above.
>
> Also I think the CPU is free to change the order of the two
> instructions and so this commit won't make a difference. Also I don't
Yes, if the CPU uses weak memroy model, it is possible for the instructions to be reordered.
therefore, it is a good idea to insert an smb() between these two lines if there is race here.
Thanks.
> feel there is a race here as wake_up() hasn't happened.
>
>> transition_task = NULL;
>> ... //A overwrites the task
>> ... //performing the transition
>> ... //result in error warning.
>> }
>>
>> To fix this race condition, the order of the updates to the
>> 'transition_task' and 'transition_ongoing' fields has been changed, the
>> 'transition_task' field is now cleared before the 'transition_ongoing'
>> field, which ensure that only one task can update the 'transition_task'
>> field at a time.
>>
>> Fixes: ca654dc3a93d ("cpufreq: Catch double invocations of cpufreq_freq_transition_begin/end")
>> Signed-off-by: Liao Chang <liaochang1@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> index a757f90aa9d6..f8eb6dde57f2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
>> @@ -455,8 +455,8 @@ void cpufreq_freq_transition_end(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>> policy->cur,
>> policy->cpuinfo.max_freq);
>>
>> - policy->transition_ongoing = false;
>> policy->transition_task = NULL;
>> + policy->transition_ongoing = false;
>>
>> wake_up(&policy->transition_wait);
>> }
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>
--
BR
Liao, Chang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-28 8:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-26 9:58 Liao Chang
2023-08-28 7:23 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-08-28 8:29 ` Liao, Chang [this message]
2023-08-28 8:52 ` Viresh Kumar
2023-08-28 8:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-08-29 6:17 ` Liao, Chang
2023-08-28 9:29 ` Liao, Chang
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=bcac1b3c-a2f7-7f18-4c2f-5cf27f4e89b5@huawei.com \
--to=liaochang1@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--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®