diff mbox

cpufreq: exynos5440: Protect opp search calls with rcu lock

Message ID 1366007087-12090-1-git-send-email-amit.daniel@samsung.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Amit Kachhap April 15, 2013, 6:24 a.m. UTC
As per the OPP library documentation(Documentation/power/opp.txt) all
opp find/get calls should be protected by rcu locks.

Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com>
---

This patch is created against linux-next tree and is suggested by
Nishanth Menon. (https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/12/119)

 drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c |    3 +++
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

Comments

Nishanth Menon April 15, 2013, 2:10 p.m. UTC | #1
Daniel,
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Amit Daniel Kachhap
<amit.daniel@samsung.com> wrote:
> As per the OPP library documentation(Documentation/power/opp.txt) all
> opp find/get calls should be protected by rcu locks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com>
> ---
>
> This patch is created against linux-next tree and is suggested by
> Nishanth Menon. (https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/12/119)
>
>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c |    3 +++
>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
> index ead7ed4..0c74018 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
> @@ -120,11 +120,13 @@ static int init_div_table(void)
>         int i = 0;
>         struct opp *opp;
>
> +       rcu_read_lock();
>         for (i = 0; freq_tbl[i].frequency != CPUFREQ_TABLE_END; i++) {
>
>                 opp = opp_find_freq_exact(dvfs_info->dev,
>                                         freq_tbl[i].frequency * 1000, true);
>                 if (IS_ERR(opp)) {
> +                       rcu_read_unlock();
>                         dev_err(dvfs_info->dev,
>                                 "failed to find valid OPP for %u KHZ\n",
>                                 freq_tbl[i].frequency);
> @@ -159,6 +161,7 @@ static int init_div_table(void)
>                 __raw_writel(tmp, dvfs_info->base + XMU_PMU_P0_7 + 4 * i);
>         }
>
> +       rcu_read_unlock();

Is it not possible to reduce the amount of code protected by RCU lock?
something like this:
+               rcu_read_lock();
                opp = opp_find_freq_exact(dvfs_info->dev,
                                        freq_tbl[i].frequency * 1000, true);
                if (IS_ERR(opp)) {
+                       rcu_read_unlock();
                        dev_err(dvfs_info->dev,
                                "failed to find valid OPP for %u KHZ\n",
                                freq_tbl[i].frequency);
                        return PTR_ERR(opp);
                }
+               volt_id = opp_get_voltage(opp);
+               rcu_unlock();
Amit Kachhap April 16, 2013, 6:51 a.m. UTC | #2
Hi Nishanth,

Thanks for reviewing this patch.

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> wrote:
> Daniel,
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Amit Daniel Kachhap
> <amit.daniel@samsung.com> wrote:
>> As per the OPP library documentation(Documentation/power/opp.txt) all
>> opp find/get calls should be protected by rcu locks.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>
>> This patch is created against linux-next tree and is suggested by
>> Nishanth Menon. (https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/12/119)
>>
>>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c |    3 +++
>>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
>> index ead7ed4..0c74018 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
>> @@ -120,11 +120,13 @@ static int init_div_table(void)
>>         int i = 0;
>>         struct opp *opp;
>>
>> +       rcu_read_lock();
>>         for (i = 0; freq_tbl[i].frequency != CPUFREQ_TABLE_END; i++) {
>>
>>                 opp = opp_find_freq_exact(dvfs_info->dev,
>>                                         freq_tbl[i].frequency * 1000, true);
>>                 if (IS_ERR(opp)) {
>> +                       rcu_read_unlock();
>>                         dev_err(dvfs_info->dev,
>>                                 "failed to find valid OPP for %u KHZ\n",
>>                                 freq_tbl[i].frequency);
>> @@ -159,6 +161,7 @@ static int init_div_table(void)
>>                 __raw_writel(tmp, dvfs_info->base + XMU_PMU_P0_7 + 4 * i);
>>         }
>>
>> +       rcu_read_unlock();
>
> Is it not possible to reduce the amount of code protected by RCU lock?
> something like this:
Yes it is possible but then this part of code is a loop of max 8
iteration so rcu_read_lock will be called those many times.
Also this code blocks are just register writes and not doing any time
consuming operations.

Thanks,
Amit Daniel
> +               rcu_read_lock();
>                 opp = opp_find_freq_exact(dvfs_info->dev,
>                                         freq_tbl[i].frequency * 1000, true);
>                 if (IS_ERR(opp)) {
> +                       rcu_read_unlock();
>                         dev_err(dvfs_info->dev,
>                                 "failed to find valid OPP for %u KHZ\n",
>                                 freq_tbl[i].frequency);
>                         return PTR_ERR(opp);
>                 }
> +               volt_id = opp_get_voltage(opp);
> +               rcu_unlock();
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Rafael Wysocki April 21, 2013, 11:32 p.m. UTC | #3
On Monday, April 15, 2013 11:54:47 AM Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote:
> As per the OPP library documentation(Documentation/power/opp.txt) all
> opp find/get calls should be protected by rcu locks.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@samsung.com>
> ---
> 
> This patch is created against linux-next tree and is suggested by
> Nishanth Menon. (https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/12/119)

Applied.

Thanks,
Rafael


>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c |    3 +++
>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
> index ead7ed4..0c74018 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
> @@ -120,11 +120,13 @@ static int init_div_table(void)
>  	int i = 0;
>  	struct opp *opp;
>  
> +	rcu_read_lock();
>  	for (i = 0; freq_tbl[i].frequency != CPUFREQ_TABLE_END; i++) {
>  
>  		opp = opp_find_freq_exact(dvfs_info->dev,
>  					freq_tbl[i].frequency * 1000, true);
>  		if (IS_ERR(opp)) {
> +			rcu_read_unlock();
>  			dev_err(dvfs_info->dev,
>  				"failed to find valid OPP for %u KHZ\n",
>  				freq_tbl[i].frequency);
> @@ -159,6 +161,7 @@ static int init_div_table(void)
>  		__raw_writel(tmp, dvfs_info->base + XMU_PMU_P0_7 + 4 * i);
>  	}
>  
> +	rcu_read_unlock();
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
>
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
index ead7ed4..0c74018 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos5440-cpufreq.c
@@ -120,11 +120,13 @@  static int init_div_table(void)
 	int i = 0;
 	struct opp *opp;
 
+	rcu_read_lock();
 	for (i = 0; freq_tbl[i].frequency != CPUFREQ_TABLE_END; i++) {
 
 		opp = opp_find_freq_exact(dvfs_info->dev,
 					freq_tbl[i].frequency * 1000, true);
 		if (IS_ERR(opp)) {
+			rcu_read_unlock();
 			dev_err(dvfs_info->dev,
 				"failed to find valid OPP for %u KHZ\n",
 				freq_tbl[i].frequency);
@@ -159,6 +161,7 @@  static int init_div_table(void)
 		__raw_writel(tmp, dvfs_info->base + XMU_PMU_P0_7 + 4 * i);
 	}
 
+	rcu_read_unlock();
 	return 0;
 }