drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 10 ++++++++-- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() can return NULL when the target CPU is not present
in the policy->cpus mask. scmi_cpufreq_get_rate() does not check for
this case, which results in a NULL pointer dereference.
Add NULL check after cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() to prevent this issue.
Fixes: 99d6bdf33877 ("cpufreq: add support for CPU DVFS based on SCMI message protocol")
Signed-off-by: Henry Martin <bsdhenrymartin@gmail.com>
---
drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 10 ++++++++--
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
index c310aeebc8f3..c735f39245bf 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
@@ -37,11 +37,17 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver scmi_cpufreq_driver;
static unsigned int scmi_cpufreq_get_rate(unsigned int cpu)
{
- struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
- struct scmi_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
+ struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
+ struct scmi_data *priv;
unsigned long rate;
int ret;
+ policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
+ if (!policy)
+ return 0;
+
+ priv = policy->driver_data;
+
ret = perf_ops->freq_get(ph, priv->domain_id, &rate, false);
if (ret)
return 0;
--
2.34.1
On Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 01:54:47PM +0800, Henry Martin wrote:
> cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() can return NULL when the target CPU is not present
> in the policy->cpus mask. scmi_cpufreq_get_rate() does not check for
> this case, which results in a NULL pointer dereference.
>
> Add NULL check after cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() to prevent this issue.
>
> Fixes: 99d6bdf33877 ("cpufreq: add support for CPU DVFS based on SCMI message protocol")
> Signed-off-by: Henry Martin <bsdhenrymartin@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 10 ++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> index c310aeebc8f3..c735f39245bf 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> @@ -37,11 +37,17 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver scmi_cpufreq_driver;
>
> static unsigned int scmi_cpufreq_get_rate(unsigned int cpu)
> {
> - struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
> - struct scmi_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> + struct scmi_data *priv;
> unsigned long rate;
> int ret;
>
> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
> + if (!policy)
How about `if (unlikely(!policy))` instead ?
With that you can add :
Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Both comment and review applies for scpi-cpufreq.c
--
Regards,
Sudeep
On 07-04-25, 12:30, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 01:54:47PM +0800, Henry Martin wrote:
> > cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() can return NULL when the target CPU is not present
> > in the policy->cpus mask. scmi_cpufreq_get_rate() does not check for
> > this case, which results in a NULL pointer dereference.
> >
> > Add NULL check after cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() to prevent this issue.
> >
> > Fixes: 99d6bdf33877 ("cpufreq: add support for CPU DVFS based on SCMI message protocol")
> > Signed-off-by: Henry Martin <bsdhenrymartin@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 10 ++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> > index c310aeebc8f3..c735f39245bf 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> > @@ -37,11 +37,17 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver scmi_cpufreq_driver;
> >
> > static unsigned int scmi_cpufreq_get_rate(unsigned int cpu)
> > {
> > - struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
> > - struct scmi_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
> > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> > + struct scmi_data *priv;
> > unsigned long rate;
> > int ret;
> >
> > + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
> > + if (!policy)
>
> How about `if (unlikely(!policy))` instead ?
Henry, this change applies to all the patches you have sent. Also please send
them as a single series, as they are related changes.
--
viresh
> How about `if (unlikely(!policy))` instead ?
Agreed, unlikely() makes sense here since the NULL check is for an
exceptional case.
I'll update all relevant patches accordingly.
> Henry, this change applies to all the patches you have sent. Also please send
> them as a single series, as they are related changes.
Noted. I’ll consolidate the patches into a single series with a proper
cover letter and
resend them shortly.
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> 于2025年4月8日周二 13:55写道:
>
> On 07-04-25, 12:30, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 01:54:47PM +0800, Henry Martin wrote:
> > > cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() can return NULL when the target CPU is not present
> > > in the policy->cpus mask. scmi_cpufreq_get_rate() does not check for
> > > this case, which results in a NULL pointer dereference.
> > >
> > > Add NULL check after cpufreq_cpu_get_raw() to prevent this issue.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 99d6bdf33877 ("cpufreq: add support for CPU DVFS based on SCMI message protocol")
> > > Signed-off-by: Henry Martin <bsdhenrymartin@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 10 ++++++++--
> > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> > > index c310aeebc8f3..c735f39245bf 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> > > @@ -37,11 +37,17 @@ static struct cpufreq_driver scmi_cpufreq_driver;
> > >
> > > static unsigned int scmi_cpufreq_get_rate(unsigned int cpu)
> > > {
> > > - struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
> > > - struct scmi_data *priv = policy->driver_data;
> > > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> > > + struct scmi_data *priv;
> > > unsigned long rate;
> > > int ret;
> > >
> > > + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu);
> > > + if (!policy)
> >
> > How about `if (unlikely(!policy))` instead ?
>
> Henry, this change applies to all the patches you have sent. Also please send
> them as a single series, as they are related changes.
>
> --
> viresh
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.