lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jun]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v8 4/8] PM / EM: add support for other devices than CPUs in Energy Model
    From
    Date


    On 6/8/20 1:51 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
    > On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 01:34:37PM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote:
    >> Hi Dan,
    >>
    >> Thank you for your analyzes.
    >>
    >> On 6/8/20 12:51 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
    >>> Hi Lukasz,
    >>>
    >>> I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:
    >>>
    >>> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Lukasz-Luba/Add-support-for-devices-in-the-Energy-Model/20200527-180614
    >>> base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git linux-next
    >>>
    >>> config: i386-randconfig-m021-20200605 (attached as .config)
    >>> compiler: gcc-9 (Debian 9.3.0-13) 9.3.0
    >>>
    >>> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
    >>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
    >>> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
    >>>
    >>> smatch warnings:
    >>> kernel/power/energy_model.c:316 em_dev_register_perf_domain() error: we previously assumed 'dev->em_pd' could be null (see line 277)
    >>>
    >>> # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/110d050cb7ba1c96e63ada498979d1fd99529be2
    >>> git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
    >>> git remote update linux-review
    >>> git checkout 110d050cb7ba1c96e63ada498979d1fd99529be2
    >>> vim +316 kernel/power/energy_model.c
    >>>
    >>> 0e294e607adaf3 Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 262 int em_dev_register_perf_domain(struct device *dev, unsigned int nr_states,
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 263 struct em_data_callback *cb, cpumask_t *cpus)
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 264 {
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 265 unsigned long cap, prev_cap = 0;
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 266 int cpu, ret;
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 267
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 268 if (!dev || !nr_states || !cb)
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 269 return -EINVAL;
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 270
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 271 /*
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 272 * Use a mutex to serialize the registration of performance domains and
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 273 * let the driver-defined callback functions sleep.
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 274 */
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 275 mutex_lock(&em_pd_mutex);
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 276
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 @277 if (dev->em_pd) {
    >>> ^^^^^^^^^^
    >>> Check for NULL.
    >>>
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 278 ret = -EEXIST;
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 279 goto unlock;
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 280 }
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 281
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 282 if (_is_cpu_device(dev)) {
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 283 if (!cpus) {
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 284 dev_err(dev, "EM: invalid CPU mask\n");
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 285 ret = -EINVAL;
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 286 goto unlock;
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 287 }
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 288
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 289 for_each_cpu(cpu, cpus) {
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 290 if (em_cpu_get(cpu)) {
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 291 dev_err(dev, "EM: exists for CPU%d\n", cpu);
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 292 ret = -EEXIST;
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 293 goto unlock;
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 294 }
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 295 /*
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 296 * All CPUs of a domain must have the same
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 297 * micro-architecture since they all share the same
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 298 * table.
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 299 */
    >>> 8ec59c0f5f4966 Vincent Guittot 2019-06-17 300 cap = arch_scale_cpu_capacity(cpu);
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 301 if (prev_cap && prev_cap != cap) {
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 302 dev_err(dev, "EM: CPUs of %*pbl must have the same capacity\n",
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 303 cpumask_pr_args(cpus));
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 304
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 305 ret = -EINVAL;
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 306 goto unlock;
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 307 }
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 308 prev_cap = cap;
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 309 }
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 310 }
    >>> 27871f7a8a341e Quentin Perret 2018-12-03 311
    >>> 110d050cb7ba1c Lukasz Luba 2020-05-27 312 ret = em_create_pd(dev, nr_states, cb, cpus);
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> If it's a _is_cpu_device() then it iterates through a bunch of devices
    >>> and sets up cpu_dev->em_pd for each. Presumably one of the devices is
    >>> "dev" or this would crash pretty early on in testing?
    >>
    >> Yes, all of the devices taken from 'cpus' mask will get the em_pd set
    >> including the suspected @dev.
    >> To calm down this static analyzer I can remove the 'else'
    >> in line 204 to make 'dev->em_pd = pd' set always.
    >> 199 if (_is_cpu_device(dev))
    >> 200 for_each_cpu(cpu, cpus) {
    >> 201 cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
    >> 202 cpu_dev->em_pd = pd;
    >> 203 }
    >> 204 else
    >> 205 dev->em_pd = pd;
    >>
    >>
    >> Do you think it's a good solution and will work for this tool?
    >
    > It's not about the tool... Ignore the tool when it's wrong. But I do
    > think the code is slightly more clear without the else statement.
    >
    > Arguments could be made either way. Removing the else statement means
    > we set dev->em_pd twice... But I *personally* lean vaguely towards
    > removing the else statement. :P

    Thanks, I will remove the else statement and add your 'Reported-by'

    Regards,
    Lukasz

    >
    > That would make the warning go away as well.
    >
    > regards,
    > dan carpenter
    >

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2020-06-08 15:00    [W:2.353 / U:0.320 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site