Re: [PATCH RFC 02/22] x86: intel_epb: Don't rely on link order
From: Gavin Shan <hidden>
Date: 2023-11-13 00:04:23
Also in:
kvmarm, linux-acpi, linux-arch, linux-doc, linux-pm, linux-riscv, lkml, loongarch
On 11/7/23 20:29, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
From: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> intel_epb_init() is called as a subsys_initcall() to register cpuhp callbacks. The callbacks make use of get_cpu_device() which will return NULL unless register_cpu() has been called. register_cpu() is called from topology_init(), which is also a subsys_initcall(). This is fragile. Moving the register_cpu() to a different subsys_initcall() leads to a NULL dereference during boot. Make intel_epb_init() a late_initcall(), user-space can't provide a policy before this point anyway. Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <redacted> --- subsys_initcall_sync() would be an option, but moving the register_cpu() calls into ACPI also means adding a safety net for CPUs that are online but not described properly by firmware. This lives in subsys_initcall_sync(). --- arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_epb.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <redacted> _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel