On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 8:47 AM Shivnandan KumarYes,corrected subject now.
<quic_kshivnan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
CPU frequency should never be negative.Do you mean "always be non-negative"?
Want to make sure to guard against negative value.
If some client driver calls freq_qos_update_request with someWhy do you check against the defaults?
value greater than INT_MAX, then it will set max CPU freq at
fmax but it will add plist node with some negative priority.
plist node has priority from INT_MIN (highest) to INT_MAX
(lowest). Once priority is set as negative, another client
will not be able to reduce max CPU frequency. Adding check
to make sure CPU freq is non-negative will fix this problem.
Signed-off-by: Shivnandan Kumar <quic_kshivnan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/power/qos.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/power/qos.c b/kernel/power/qos.c
index ec7e1e85923e..41e96fe34bfd 100644
--- a/kernel/power/qos.c
+++ b/kernel/power/qos.c
@@ -531,7 +531,8 @@ int freq_qos_add_request(struct freq_constraints *qos,
{
int ret;
- if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(qos) || !req)
+ if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(qos) || !req || value < FREQ_QOS_MIN_DEFAULT_VALUE
+ || value > FREQ_QOS_MAX_DEFAULT_VALUE)
yes, checking against negative values will be sufficient.
return -EINVAL;I agree that it should guard against adding negative values, but I
if (WARN(freq_qos_request_active(req),
@@ -563,7 +564,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(freq_qos_add_request);
*/
int freq_qos_update_request(struct freq_qos_request *req, s32 new_value)
{
- if (!req)
+ if (!req || new_value < FREQ_QOS_MIN_DEFAULT_VALUE ||
+ new_value > FREQ_QOS_MAX_DEFAULT_VALUE)
return -EINVAL;
if (WARN(!freq_qos_request_active(req),
--
don't see why s32 can be greater than INT_MAX.
Because function freq_qos_remove_request calls freq_qos_apply with PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE which is actually negative.
Also why don't you put the guard into freq_qos_apply() instead of
duplicating it in the callers of that function?