linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Change link order of x86 cpufreq modules

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 18 Feb 2009 20:09:43 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc:	davej@...emonkey.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	cpufreq@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Change link order of x86 cpufreq modules


* Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 07:31:37PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > Nice fix! Where does this information come from? Distro module 
> > ordering magic? It's rather non-trivial.
> 
> Pretty much. p4-clockmod is never the preferred option because 
> it does no voltage scaling. speedstep-centrino is now almost 
> entirely functionally replaced with acpi-cpufreq. The 
> powernow-k8 issue was a personal communication from davej.

I'm wondering whether that priority order should/could be 
expressed in the module space too - so that distros wouldnt have 
to replicate this. This is really a piece of information the 
kernel is best at maintaining.

> > (small style nit: the first line in the Makefile is overlong.)
> 
> Seems to be 79 characters?

[ oops, my eye-guesstimator is failing me :) ]

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/