Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: use cpufreq_cpu_get to avoid cpufreq_get race conditions

From: Viresh Kumar
Date: Mon Mar 10 2014 - 00:27:13 EST


On 6 March 2014 09:23, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 04, 2014 12:42:15 PM Aaron Plattner wrote:
>> If a module calls cpufreq_get while cpufreq is initializing, it's possible for
>> it to be called after cpufreq_driver is set but before cpufreq_cpu_data is
>> written during subsys_interface_register. This happens because cpufreq_get
>> doesn't take the cpufreq_driver_lock around its use of cpufreq_cpu_data.
>
> Is this a theoretical race, or can you actually reproduce it? If so, on what
> system/driver? Or are there any bug reports related to this you can point me
> to?
>
>> Fix this by using cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu) to look up the policy rather than reading
>> it out of cpufreq_cpu_data directly. cpufreq_cpu_get takes the appropriate
>> locks to prevent this race from happening.
>>
>> Since it's possible for policy to be NULL if the caller passes in an invalid CPU
>> number or calls the function before cpufreq is initialized, delete the
>> BUG_ON(!policy) and simply return 0. Don't try to return -ENOENT because that's
>> negative and the function returns an unsigned integer.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Aaron Plattner <aplattner@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Viresh, have you seen this?

Sorry for being late. Though I see you have already applied this one,
I will still add this for records :)

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/