| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:12:52 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, mingo@...e.hu, bphilips@...e.de, yinghai@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeff@...zik.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, stern@...land.harvard.edu, gregkh@...e.de, khali@...ux-fr.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/12] irq: implement IRQ expecting On Thu, 17 Jun 2010, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Arjan. > > On 06/17/2010 05:48 AM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:31:35 +0200 > > Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote: > >> + */ > >> +void expect_irq(struct irq_expect *exp) > > > > I would like to suggest an (optional) argument to this with a duration > > within which to expect an interrupt.... > > > > that way in the backend we can plumb this also into the idle handler > > for C state selection... > > Hmmm.... oh, I see. Wouldn't it be much better to use moving avg of > IRQ durations instead of letting the driver specify it? Drivers are > most likely to just hard code it and It's never gonna be accurate. Right, but that's probably more accurate than the core code heuristics ever will be. Thanks, tglx -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists