summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/cpus.h
blob: 062672677d73b72319e93f546a8c70f3899c7ad4 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
#ifndef CPUS_H
#define CPUS_H

#include <unistd.h>
#include "built_in.h"
#include "die.h"

static inline unsigned int get_number_cpus(void)
{
	int ret = sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF);

	if (unlikely(ret <= 0))
		panic("get_number_cpus error!\n");

	return ret;
}

static inline unsigned int get_number_cpus_online(void)
{
	int ret = sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN);

	if (unlikely(ret <= 0))
		panic("get_number_cpus_online error!\n");

	return ret;
}

#endif /* CPUS_H */
eu>2017-01-11 14:00:21 +0100 committerVinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>2017-01-25 15:35:11 +0530 commit91539eb1fda2d530d3b268eef542c5414e54bf1a (patch) tree960f5ca6342ad20837aff18aad6e8ecd7da32fd6 /tools/perf parent6610d0edf6dc7ee97e46ab3a538a565c79d26199 (diff)
dmaengine: pl330: fix double lock
The static bug finder EBA (http://www.iagoabal.eu/eba/) reported the following double-lock bug: Double lock: 1. spin_lock_irqsave(pch->lock, flags) at pl330_free_chan_resources:2236; 2. call to function `pl330_release_channel' immediately after; 3. call to function `dma_pl330_rqcb' in line 1753; 4. spin_lock_irqsave(pch->lock, flags) at dma_pl330_rqcb:1505. I have fixed it as suggested by Marek Szyprowski. First, I have replaced `pch->lock' with `pl330->lock' in functions `pl330_alloc_chan_resources' and `pl330_free_chan_resources'. This avoids the double-lock by acquiring a different lock than `dma_pl330_rqcb'. NOTE that, as a result, `pl330_free_chan_resources' executes `list_splice_tail_init' on `pch->work_list' under lock `pl330->lock', whereas in the rest of the code `pch->work_list' is protected by `pch->lock'. I don't know if this may cause race conditions. Similarly `pch->cyclic' is written by `pl330_alloc_chan_resources' under `pl330->lock' but read by `pl330_tx_submit' under `pch->lock'. Second, I have removed locking from `pl330_request_channel' and `pl330_release_channel' functions. Function `pl330_request_channel' is only called from `pl330_alloc_chan_resources', so the lock is already held. Function `pl330_release_channel' is called from `pl330_free_chan_resources', which already holds the lock, and from `pl330_del'. Function `pl330_del' is called in an error path of `pl330_probe' and at the end of `pl330_remove', but I assume that there cannot be concurrent accesses to the protected data at those points. Signed-off-by: Iago Abal <mail@iagoabal.eu> Reviewed-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'tools/perf')