linux-kernel - Re: next-20130206 cpufreq

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:	Thu, 07 Feb 2013 14:18:56 -0500
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: next-20130206 cpufreq - WARN in sysfs_add_one

On Thu, 07 Feb 2013 13:11:52 +0530, Viresh Kumar said:

> First of all i want to confirm something about your system. I am sure it is a
> multi-policy system (or multi cluster system). i.e. there are more than one
> clock line for different cpus ? And so multiple struct policy exist
> simultaneously.

Hmm.. it's a bog-standard Dell Latitude E6500 laptop, with a single
Core2 Duo P8700 CPU (one die, 2 cores, no HT). It's apparently able
to clock both cores at different speeds (one core running busy at 2540mhz
and the other idling at 800mhz), if that's what you mean by multiple
clock lines.

In any case, next-20130206 complained, and with this patch added I see
nothing in dmesg and cpufreq is acting properly on both cores, so:

Tested-By: Valdis Kletnieks <valdis.kletnieks@...edu>

(btw - I had to hand-apply your patch, as it showed up white-space
damaged.  Three lines wrapped, and tabs converted to spaces).

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped