From patchwork Fri Jun 25 13:41:30 2021 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: TungChen Shih X-Patchwork-Id: 467186 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY, USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56E14C2B9F4 for ; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 13:41:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3986661981 for ; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 13:41:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229573AbhFYNoM (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 09:44:12 -0400 Received: from mailgw02.mediatek.com ([210.61.82.184]:40834 "EHLO mailgw02.mediatek.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229498AbhFYNoM (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 09:44:12 -0400 X-UUID: 23ea012c1ad045c08f9b12ad6cce49c5-20210625 X-UUID: 23ea012c1ad045c08f9b12ad6cce49c5-20210625 Received: from mtkmbs10n1.mediatek.inc [(172.21.101.34)] by mailgw02.mediatek.com (envelope-from ) (Generic MTA with TLSv1.2 ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 256/256) with ESMTP id 798672426; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 21:41:48 +0800 Received: from mtkcas11.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.40) by mtkmbs02n1.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.77) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 21:41:46 +0800 Received: from mtksdccf07.mediatek.inc (172.21.84.99) by mtkcas11.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 21:41:46 +0800 From: TungChen Shih To: , , CC: , , , , , TungChen Shih Subject: [PATCH v1 1/1] cpufreq: fix the target freq not in the range of policy->min & max Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2021 21:41:30 +0800 Message-ID: <20210625134129.11885-1-tung-chen.shih@mediatek.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.18.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MTK: N Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org In cpufreq_frequency_table_target(), this function will try to find an index for @target_freq in freq_table, and the frequency of selected index should be in the range [policy->min, policy->max], which means: policy->min <= policy->freq_table[idx].frequency <= policy->max Though "clamp_val(target_freq, policy->min, policy->max);" would have been called to check this condition, when policy->max or min is not exactly one of the frequency in the frequency table, policy->freq_table[idx].frequency may still go out of the range For example, if our sorted freq_table is [3000, 2000, 1000], and suppose we have: @target_freq = 2500 @policy->min = 2000 @policy->max = 2200 @relation = CPUFREQ_RELATION_L 1. After clamp_val(target_freq, policy->min, policy->max); @target_freq becomes 2200 2. Since we use CPUFREQ_REALTION_L, final selected freq will be 3000 which beyonds policy->max Signed-off-by: TungChen Shih --- include/linux/cpufreq.h | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/cpufreq.h b/include/linux/cpufreq.h index 353969c7acd3..60cb15740fdf 100644 --- a/include/linux/cpufreq.h +++ b/include/linux/cpufreq.h @@ -975,21 +975,40 @@ static inline int cpufreq_frequency_table_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int target_freq, unsigned int relation) { + int idx = 0; if (unlikely(policy->freq_table_sorted == CPUFREQ_TABLE_UNSORTED)) return cpufreq_table_index_unsorted(policy, target_freq, relation); switch (relation) { case CPUFREQ_RELATION_L: - return cpufreq_table_find_index_l(policy, target_freq); + idx = cpufreq_table_find_index_l(policy, target_freq); + break; case CPUFREQ_RELATION_H: - return cpufreq_table_find_index_h(policy, target_freq); + idx = cpufreq_table_find_index_h(policy, target_freq); + break; case CPUFREQ_RELATION_C: - return cpufreq_table_find_index_c(policy, target_freq); + idx = cpufreq_table_find_index_c(policy, target_freq); + break; default: WARN_ON_ONCE(1); return 0; } + + /* target index verification */ + if (policy->freq_table[idx].frequency > policy->max) { + if (policy->freq_table_sorted == CPUFREQ_TABLE_SORTED_ASCENDING) + idx--; + else + idx++; + } else if (policy->freq_table[idx].frequency < policy->min) { + if (policy->freq_table_sorted == CPUFREQ_TABLE_SORTED_ASCENDING) + idx++; + else + idx--; + } + + return idx; } static inline int cpufreq_table_count_valid_entries(const struct cpufreq_policy *policy)