From 71c3461ef7c67024792d283b88630245a6c169ba Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 01:19:34 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: Do not hold driver module references for additional policy CPUs The cpufreq core is a little inconsistent in the way it uses the driver module refcount. Namely, if __cpufreq_add_dev() is called for a CPU that doesn't share the policy object with any other CPUs, the driver module refcount it grabs to start with will be dropped by it before returning and will be equal to whatever it had been before that function was invoked. However, if the given CPU does share the policy object with other CPUs, either cpufreq_add_policy_cpu() is called to link the new CPU to the existing policy, or cpufreq_add_dev_symlink() is used to link the other CPUs sharing the policy with it to the just created policy object. In that case, because both cpufreq_add_policy_cpu() and cpufreq_add_dev_symlink() call cpufreq_cpu_get() for the given policy (the latter possibly many times) without the balancing cpufreq_cpu_put() (unless there is an error), the driver module refcount will be left by __cpufreq_add_dev() with a nonzero value (different from the initial one). To remove that inconsistency make cpufreq_add_policy_cpu() execute cpufreq_cpu_put() for the given policy before returning, which decrements the driver module refcount so that it will be equal to its initial value after __cpufreq_add_dev() returns. Also remove the cpufreq_cpu_get() call from cpufreq_add_dev_symlink(), since both the policy refcount and the driver module refcount are nonzero when it is called and they don't need to be bumped up by it. Accordingly, drop the cpufreq_cpu_put() from __cpufreq_remove_dev(), since it is only necessary to balance the cpufreq_cpu_get() called by cpufreq_add_policy_cpu() or cpufreq_add_dev_symlink(). Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki Reviewed-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat Acked-by: Viresh Kumar --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 28 +++++++--------------------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c index 576b312..c8b2ca0 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c @@ -818,14 +818,11 @@ static int cpufreq_add_dev_symlink(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) continue; pr_debug("Adding link for CPU: %u\n", j); - cpufreq_cpu_get(policy->cpu); cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(j); ret = sysfs_create_link(&cpu_dev->kobj, &policy->kobj, "cpufreq"); - if (ret) { - cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); - return ret; - } + if (ret) + break; } return ret; } @@ -908,7 +905,8 @@ static int cpufreq_add_policy_cpu(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int sibling, unsigned long flags; policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(sibling); - WARN_ON(!policy); + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!policy)) + return -ENODATA; if (has_target) __cpufreq_governor(policy, CPUFREQ_GOV_STOP); @@ -930,16 +928,10 @@ static int cpufreq_add_policy_cpu(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int sibling, } /* Don't touch sysfs links during light-weight init */ - if (frozen) { - /* Drop the extra refcount that we took above */ - cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); - return 0; - } - - ret = sysfs_create_link(&dev->kobj, &policy->kobj, "cpufreq"); - if (ret) - cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); + if (!frozen) + ret = sysfs_create_link(&dev->kobj, &policy->kobj, "cpufreq"); + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); return ret; } #endif @@ -1298,12 +1290,6 @@ static int __cpufreq_remove_dev(struct device *dev, if (!frozen) cpufreq_policy_free(data); } else { - - if (!frozen) { - pr_debug("%s: removing link, cpu: %d\n", __func__, cpu); - cpufreq_cpu_put(data); - } - if (cpufreq_driver->target) { __cpufreq_governor(data, CPUFREQ_GOV_START); __cpufreq_governor(data, CPUFREQ_GOV_LIMITS); -- 2.7.4