Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] cpufreq: Add boost_freq_req QoS request

From: Zhongqiu Han

Date: Mon Mar 30 2026 - 00:01:02 EST


On 3/30/2026 10:10 AM, zhenglifeng (A) wrote:
On 3/29/2026 5:00 PM, Zhongqiu Han wrote:
@@ -1377,6 +1386,7 @@ static void cpufreq_policy_free(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
      }
        freq_qos_remove_request(policy->min_freq_req);
+    freq_qos_remove_request(policy->boost_freq_req);
      kfree(policy->min_freq_req);
        cpufreq_policy_put_kobj(policy);
@@ -1445,26 +1455,38 @@ static int cpufreq_policy_online(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
      cpumask_and(policy->cpus, policy->cpus, cpu_online_mask);
        if (new_policy) {
+        unsigned int count;
+
          for_each_cpu(j, policy->related_cpus) {
              per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_data, j) = policy;
              add_cpu_dev_symlink(policy, j, get_cpu_device(j));
          }
  -        policy->min_freq_req = kzalloc(2 * sizeof(*policy->min_freq_req),
+        count = policy->boost_supported ? 3 : 2;
+        policy->min_freq_req = kzalloc(count * sizeof(*policy->min_freq_req),
                             GFP_KERNEL);
          if (!policy->min_freq_req) {
              ret = -ENOMEM;
              goto out_destroy_policy;
          }
  +        if (policy->boost_supported) {
+            policy->boost_freq_req = policy->min_freq_req + 2;
+
+            ret = freq_qos_add_request(&policy->constraints,
+                           policy->boost_freq_req,
+                           FREQ_QOS_MAX,
+                           policy->cpuinfo.max_freq);
+            if (ret < 0) {
+                policy->boost_freq_req = NULL;
+                goto out_destroy_policy;
+            }
+        }
+
          ret = freq_qos_add_request(&policy->constraints,
                         policy->min_freq_req, FREQ_QOS_MIN,
                         FREQ_QOS_MIN_DEFAULT_VALUE);
          if (ret < 0) {
-            /*
-             * So we don't call freq_qos_remove_request() for an
-             * uninitialized request.
-             */
              kfree(policy->min_freq_req);
              policy->min_freq_req = NULL;
              goto out_destroy_policy;

Hi Pierre, Viresh,

Sorry for the late follow-up on v8. While re-reading the patch, I
noticed a potential UAF issue on an error path — I might be missing
something, so I'd appreciate a double-check.

min_freq_req, max_freq_req and boost_freq_req all point into the same
contiguous kzalloc'd block:

slot0 (min_freq_req + 0) -> min_freq_req
slot1 (min_freq_req + 1) -> max_freq_req
slot2 (min_freq_req + 2) -> boost_freq_req

If boost_freq_req is successfully added to the QoS constraints list, but
the subsequent freq_qos_add_request() for min_freq_req fails, the error
path does:

kfree(policy->min_freq_req); /* frees the entire block, including slot2
*/
policy->min_freq_req = NULL;
goto out_destroy_policy;

policy->boost_freq_req is not set to NULL here, so it becomes a dangling
pointer into freed memory.
cpufreq_policy_free() is then called from cpufreq_online() and does:

freq_qos_remove_request(policy->boost_freq_req); /* UAF */
or this boost qos req will leak.


Good catch!

How about remove the kfree() here and just leave it to
cpufreq_policy_free()?


Thanks for the suggestion — this is another fix approach we can
explore, but there seems to be a small caveat.

Some additional changes would still be needed; otherwise, removing the
kfree() here and deferring it to cpufreq_policy_free() can lead to a
warning.

The reason is that we neither free policy->min_freq_req nor set policy
->min_freq_req = NULL. As a result, when cpufreq_policy_free() later
calls freq_qos_remove_request(policy->min_freq_req), it hits the
following warning:

if (WARN(!freq_qos_request_active(req),
"%s() called for unknown object\n", __func__))
return -EINVAL;




--
Thx and BRs,
Zhongqiu Han