| Message ID | 20200316135743.57735-1-psampat@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | cpufreq: powernv: Fix frame-size-overflow in powernv_cpufreq_work_fn | expand |
Hi Pratik, Thanks. I have checked: - for matching puts/gets - that all the '.' to '->' conversions, aud uses of '&' check out - that the Snowpatch checks pass (https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1255580/) On that basis: Reviewed-by: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net> Regards, Daniel > The patch avoids allocating cpufreq_policy on stack hence fixing frame > size overflow in 'powernv_cpufreq_work_fn' > > Fixes: 227942809b52 ("cpufreq: powernv: Restore cpu frequency to policy->cur on unthrottling") > Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh Sampat <psampat@linux.ibm.com> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c | 13 ++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c > index 56f4bc0d209e..20ee0661555a 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c > @@ -902,6 +902,7 @@ static struct notifier_block powernv_cpufreq_reboot_nb = { > void powernv_cpufreq_work_fn(struct work_struct *work) > { > struct chip *chip = container_of(work, struct chip, throttle); > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy; > unsigned int cpu; > cpumask_t mask; > > @@ -916,12 +917,14 @@ void powernv_cpufreq_work_fn(struct work_struct *work) > chip->restore = false; > for_each_cpu(cpu, &mask) { > int index; > - struct cpufreq_policy policy; > > - cpufreq_get_policy(&policy, cpu); > - index = cpufreq_table_find_index_c(&policy, policy.cur); > - powernv_cpufreq_target_index(&policy, index); > - cpumask_andnot(&mask, &mask, policy.cpus); > + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); > + if (!policy) > + continue; > + index = cpufreq_table_find_index_c(policy, policy->cur); > + powernv_cpufreq_target_index(policy, index); > + cpumask_andnot(&mask, &mask, policy->cpus); > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); > } > out: > put_online_cpus(); > -- > 2.24.1
On Monday, March 16, 2020 2:57:43 PM CET Pratik Rajesh Sampat wrote: > The patch avoids allocating cpufreq_policy on stack hence fixing frame > size overflow in 'powernv_cpufreq_work_fn' > > Fixes: 227942809b52 ("cpufreq: powernv: Restore cpu frequency to policy->cur on unthrottling") > Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh Sampat <psampat@linux.ibm.com> Any objections or concerns here? If not, I'll queue it up. > --- > drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c | 13 ++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c > index 56f4bc0d209e..20ee0661555a 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c > @@ -902,6 +902,7 @@ static struct notifier_block powernv_cpufreq_reboot_nb = { > void powernv_cpufreq_work_fn(struct work_struct *work) > { > struct chip *chip = container_of(work, struct chip, throttle); > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy; > unsigned int cpu; > cpumask_t mask; > > @@ -916,12 +917,14 @@ void powernv_cpufreq_work_fn(struct work_struct *work) > chip->restore = false; > for_each_cpu(cpu, &mask) { > int index; > - struct cpufreq_policy policy; > > - cpufreq_get_policy(&policy, cpu); > - index = cpufreq_table_find_index_c(&policy, policy.cur); > - powernv_cpufreq_target_index(&policy, index); > - cpumask_andnot(&mask, &mask, policy.cpus); > + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); > + if (!policy) > + continue; > + index = cpufreq_table_find_index_c(policy, policy->cur); > + powernv_cpufreq_target_index(policy, index); > + cpumask_andnot(&mask, &mask, policy->cpus); > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); > } > out: > put_online_cpus(); >
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 07:27:43PM +0530, Pratik Rajesh Sampat wrote: > The patch avoids allocating cpufreq_policy on stack hence fixing frame > size overflow in 'powernv_cpufreq_work_fn' > Thanks for fixing this. > Fixes: 227942809b52 ("cpufreq: powernv: Restore cpu frequency to policy->cur on unthrottling") > Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh Sampat <psampat@linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Gautham R. Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c | 13 ++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c > index 56f4bc0d209e..20ee0661555a 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c > @@ -902,6 +902,7 @@ static struct notifier_block powernv_cpufreq_reboot_nb = { > void powernv_cpufreq_work_fn(struct work_struct *work) > { > struct chip *chip = container_of(work, struct chip, throttle); > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy; > unsigned int cpu; > cpumask_t mask; > > @@ -916,12 +917,14 @@ void powernv_cpufreq_work_fn(struct work_struct *work) > chip->restore = false; > for_each_cpu(cpu, &mask) { > int index; > - struct cpufreq_policy policy; > > - cpufreq_get_policy(&policy, cpu); > - index = cpufreq_table_find_index_c(&policy, policy.cur); > - powernv_cpufreq_target_index(&policy, index); > - cpumask_andnot(&mask, &mask, policy.cpus); > + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); > + if (!policy) > + continue; > + index = cpufreq_table_find_index_c(policy, policy->cur); > + powernv_cpufreq_target_index(policy, index); > + cpumask_andnot(&mask, &mask, policy->cpus); > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); > } > out: > put_online_cpus(); > -- > 2.24.1 >
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> writes: > On Monday, March 16, 2020 2:57:43 PM CET Pratik Rajesh Sampat wrote: >> The patch avoids allocating cpufreq_policy on stack hence fixing frame >> size overflow in 'powernv_cpufreq_work_fn' >> >> Fixes: 227942809b52 ("cpufreq: powernv: Restore cpu frequency to policy->cur on unthrottling") >> Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh Sampat <psampat@linux.ibm.com> > > Any objections or concerns here? > > If not, I'll queue it up. I have it in my testing branch, but if you pick it up I can drop it. cheers >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c >> index 56f4bc0d209e..20ee0661555a 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c >> @@ -902,6 +902,7 @@ static struct notifier_block powernv_cpufreq_reboot_nb = { >> void powernv_cpufreq_work_fn(struct work_struct *work) >> { >> struct chip *chip = container_of(work, struct chip, throttle); >> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy; >> unsigned int cpu; >> cpumask_t mask; >> >> @@ -916,12 +917,14 @@ void powernv_cpufreq_work_fn(struct work_struct *work) >> chip->restore = false; >> for_each_cpu(cpu, &mask) { >> int index; >> - struct cpufreq_policy policy; >> >> - cpufreq_get_policy(&policy, cpu); >> - index = cpufreq_table_find_index_c(&policy, policy.cur); >> - powernv_cpufreq_target_index(&policy, index); >> - cpumask_andnot(&mask, &mask, policy.cpus); >> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); >> + if (!policy) >> + continue; >> + index = cpufreq_table_find_index_c(policy, policy->cur); >> + powernv_cpufreq_target_index(policy, index); >> + cpumask_andnot(&mask, &mask, policy->cpus); >> + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); >> } >> out: >> put_online_cpus(); >>
On Tuesday, March 24, 2020 7:34:56 AM CET Michael Ellerman wrote: > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> writes: > > On Monday, March 16, 2020 2:57:43 PM CET Pratik Rajesh Sampat wrote: > >> The patch avoids allocating cpufreq_policy on stack hence fixing frame > >> size overflow in 'powernv_cpufreq_work_fn' > >> > >> Fixes: 227942809b52 ("cpufreq: powernv: Restore cpu frequency to policy->cur on unthrottling") > >> Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh Sampat <psampat@linux.ibm.com> > > > > Any objections or concerns here? > > > > If not, I'll queue it up. > > I have it in my testing branch, Great! > but if you pick it up I can drop it. Let it go in through your tree. Cheers!
On Mon, 2020-03-16 at 13:57:43 UTC, Pratik Rajesh Sampat wrote: > The patch avoids allocating cpufreq_policy on stack hence fixing frame > size overflow in 'powernv_cpufreq_work_fn' > > Fixes: 227942809b52 ("cpufreq: powernv: Restore cpu frequency to policy->cur on unthrottling") > Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh Sampat <psampat@linux.ibm.com> Applied to powerpc next, thanks. https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/d95fe371ecd28901f11256c610b988ed44e36ee2 cheers
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c index 56f4bc0d209e..20ee0661555a 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c @@ -902,6 +902,7 @@ static struct notifier_block powernv_cpufreq_reboot_nb = { void powernv_cpufreq_work_fn(struct work_struct *work) { struct chip *chip = container_of(work, struct chip, throttle); + struct cpufreq_policy *policy; unsigned int cpu; cpumask_t mask; @@ -916,12 +917,14 @@ void powernv_cpufreq_work_fn(struct work_struct *work) chip->restore = false; for_each_cpu(cpu, &mask) { int index; - struct cpufreq_policy policy; - cpufreq_get_policy(&policy, cpu); - index = cpufreq_table_find_index_c(&policy, policy.cur); - powernv_cpufreq_target_index(&policy, index); - cpumask_andnot(&mask, &mask, policy.cpus); + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu); + if (!policy) + continue; + index = cpufreq_table_find_index_c(policy, policy->cur); + powernv_cpufreq_target_index(policy, index); + cpumask_andnot(&mask, &mask, policy->cpus); + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy); } out: put_online_cpus();
The patch avoids allocating cpufreq_policy on stack hence fixing frame size overflow in 'powernv_cpufreq_work_fn' Fixes: 227942809b52 ("cpufreq: powernv: Restore cpu frequency to policy->cur on unthrottling") Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh Sampat <psampat@linux.ibm.com> --- drivers/cpufreq/powernv-cpufreq.c | 13 ++++++++----- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)