linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq: Implement per policy instances of governors

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, 4 Feb 2013 14:04:03 +0100
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, cpufreq@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org, robin.randhawa@....com,
	Steve.Bannister@....com, Liviu.Dudau@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq: Implement per policy instances of governors

On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 06:24:19PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> That's why i am highlighting it again and again. :)

Ah, see, someone caught up with it :).

> What i believe is, the place where this directory was present earlier
> (cpu/cpufreq/) wasn't the right place. Everything else was in cpu/cpu*/cpufreq,
> then why this in cpu/cpufreq/ ?

For the simple reason that the "cpu*" stuff is per-cpu - the
"cpu/cpufreq" is per system, i.e. one governor for the whole system.

> I don't know how much of a pain it would be to fix userspace for it,
> but i know it wouldn't be that small.

I wouldn't fix userspace but simply not touch it. You can add your
per-policy stuff in "cpu/cpu*" as new sysfs nodes and no need to
change anything. And, also, as I suggested earlier, you should make it
configurable since this code wouldn't make sense on x86, for example,
where one system-wide governor should suffice.

> I had another idea of doing this only for platforms where we have
> multiple struct policy alive at the same time. But didn't wanted to
> implement it before discussing this further.

Simply put it behind a config option like
CONFIG_CPU_IDLE_MULTIPLE_DRIVERS, call the whole menu
"Multi-power-domain-policy" something and that should be modulary
enough.

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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/