linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI: create "processor.bm_check

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:	Mon, 26 Jul 2010 09:24:02 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Cc:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	"Yu\, Luming" <luming.yu@...el.com>,
	Philip Langdale <philipl@...rt.org>,
	Jeff Garrett <jeff@...rrett.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-acpi\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"venki\@google.com" <venki@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: create "processor.bm_check_disable" boot param

Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org> writes:
>
> Note also that an alternative for newer systems
> is to use the intel_idle driver, which always
> ignores BM_STS, relying Linux device drivers
> to register constraints explicitly via PM_QOS.
>
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15886

Thanks.  I don't fully understand why the check for this option
is in a different place than the register check in the earlier patch? 

This needs to be also documented in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt

Other than that it looks good.

-Andi
-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/