From nobody Sun Nov 24 11:38:49 2024 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com (szxga02-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.188]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4673C17F4F2; Wed, 6 Nov 2024 01:01:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.188 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730854901; cv=none; b=e8h+NZsovPYtsclINBkpuA3zVWaVD+IcGvz2ebXeuYpDVp0tdDhnQdy6JoraZ5eljTuU4YcV5Ybli2GhkTvkQlHIfZJ/rQibScn/E0dSG+SydK+GoOTTU5uXnIYvbTM2DLVx22XxQvrbkW9zVHWbl4j0eKqW3a2/gh8lOCPz1ms= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730854901; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1t9TMw2SgXI7sUlPyzY+L1hKWpWbHsOM8itTqn1tf8s=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=CxOCQLLZumn7qruFvpymYJTdA3DApGueqPIiP0WcxUwQC6bebjWxX7RC/0SiScJHnCywmuxKVuLlz3qUs3zFnxwfRfqKk53z9RBlVbNZTdXog3ezC2g4Yp0pedY87wcZoHAtflqejVO1XetphuyRHue0T/Arh3LQz1vHKyT7+qg= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.188 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.48]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Xjn013rd9zfdcs; Wed, 6 Nov 2024 08:58:57 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemg200008.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.202.181.35]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 385DE18007C; Wed, 6 Nov 2024 09:01:34 +0800 (CST) Received: from huawei.com (10.90.53.73) by kwepemg200008.china.huawei.com (7.202.181.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Wed, 6 Nov 2024 09:01:33 +0800 From: Jinjie Ruan To: , , , , CC: Subject: [PATCH -next] cpufreq: CPPC: Fix wrong return value in cppc_get_cpu_power() Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2024 09:01:11 +0800 Message-ID: <20241106010111.2404387-1-ruanjinjie@huawei.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems702-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.179) To kwepemg200008.china.huawei.com (7.202.181.35) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" cppc_get_cpu_power() return 0 if the policy is NULL. Then in em_create_perf_table(), the later zero check for power is not valid as power is uninitialized. As Quentin pointed out, kernel energy model core check the return value of active_power() first, so if the callback failed it should tell the core. So return -EINVAL to fix it. Fixes: a78e72075642 ("cpufreq: CPPC: Fix possible null-ptr-deref for cpufre= q_cpu_get_raw()") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan Suggested-by: Quentin Perret --- drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c index cdc569cf7743..bd8f75accfa0 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cppc_cpufreq.c @@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ static int cppc_get_cpu_power(struct device *cpu_dev, =20 policy =3D cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu_dev->id); if (!policy) - return 0; + return -EINVAL; =20 cpu_data =3D policy->driver_data; perf_caps =3D &cpu_data->perf_caps; --=20 2.34.1