linux-kernel - Reconsider including phc-linux patch to control voltages

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 17 May 2011 09:39:23 -0500
From:	Arthur Machlas <arthur.machlas@...il.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Reconsider including phc-linux patch to control voltages

Hi, please cc me on any replies.

Five years ago a request was made[1] to include some patches from the
phc-linux project. This request was rejected for reasons of stability,
wasting dev time chasing bugs, and general discomfort. Mildly
supportive suggestions were made to make it either a separate driver
(it patches acpi-cpufreq) or call some 'tainted' flags.

It is currently included in the zen kernel, and now supports out of
tree building making it somewhat unecessary to include, however, the
dev's seem unable to keep up with newer kernels and releases are
becoming infrequent. Users now seem to be modifying the patch to make
sure it cleanly applies to newer kernels. Gentoo seems to be doing
this at the distro level [2].

Just wondering if any circumstances have changed that would merit
reconsidering the decision to not include the patches.

Many thanks,
Arthur

[1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/9/2/119
[2] http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/sys-power/phc-intel/files/phc-intel-0.3.2.12.1-2.6.38.patch?view=markup
--
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/