linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] thermal: Add generic cpu cooling implementation

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, 1 Feb 2012 14:57:07 +0000
From:	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
To:	Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, lenb@...nel.org, rui.zhang@...el.com,
	linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org, patches@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] thermal: Add generic cpu cooling implementation

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:43:16PM +0530, Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote:
> This patch adds support for generic cpu thermal cooling low level
> implementations using frequency scaling and cpuhotplugg currently.

We've been over this kind of thing in the past. cpu hotplug is a 
relatively expensive operation, so people have previously been 
enthusiastic about using the scheduler to simply avoid running anything 
on CPUs if they're overheating. Has any general consensus been reached 
on this?

I'm also not entirely thrilled at now having two ways to manage the cpu 
through the thermal layer. ACPI already plugs in via the passive trip 
points. If we're going to do this then I'd like to see the ACPI code 
merged in with the generic cpu cooling code.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
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/