Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Fix cpufreq regression after suspend/resume

[Alan Stern]

On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:

> Oops! You are right. Hmm, this looks quite difficult to get right :(
> There are multiple challenges here:
> 
> 1. The sysfs files must not be removed during cpu_down, and not initialized
> 
>    during cpu_up. That would help us preserve the file permissions.
> 2. But we should ensure that we really do the cpufreq-core parts of the cpu
>    initialization during cpu_up. If we fail to free some of the data-structures
>    during cpu_down, the cpu_up callback will think that a full-init is not
>    required and not do its job. That will make cpufreq behave erratically after
>    suspend/resume and take us back to square one.
> 
> 3. A full re-init in the cpu_up callback also involves memory allocations.
>    So if we don't release the memory in the cpu_down callback, we'll end up
>    in a memory leak.
> 
> I tried to address all these in this patch, but you found yet another serious
> loop-hole. I guess I'm out of ideas now... if anybody has any thoughts on how
> to get this right, then I'm all ears. Else, we'll just revert the original
> commit like Rafael suggested and leave it upto userspace to save and restore
> the permissions across suspend/resume if it wants ;-(

Asking as a naive outsider who is completely unfamiliar with the code,
why are any of these things at all troublesome?

	Can't cpu_up tell the difference between activating a brand-new
	CPU and reactivating one that was present before but was
	temporarily disabled?

	Doesn't cpu_up know which data structures get freed when an
	active CPU is temporarily deactivated?

	Doesn't cpu_down know what memory gets allocated in cpu_up?
	Can't it deallocate just the right parts for the type of
	transition it is doing?

It sounds like you're really asking how to make sure that cpu_up and 
cpu_down both know what the other is doing, so that each can do the 
opposite of the other.  That doesn't sound hard.

Alan Stern

--
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/