linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 3/5] cpuidle: idle: menu: Don't reflect when a state selection failed

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, 29 Oct 2014 07:14:18 +0530
From:	Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
CC:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	patches@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/5] cpuidle: idle: menu: Don't reflect when a state
 selection failed

On 10/28/2014 11:58 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 10/28/2014 08:01 AM, Preeti Murthy wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Daniel Lezcano
>> <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org> wrote:
>>> In the current code, the check to reflect or not the outcoming state
>>> is done
>>> against the idle state which has been chosen and its value.
>>>
>>> Instead of doing a check in each of the reflect functions, just don't
>>> call reflect
>>> if something went wrong in the idle path.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
>>> Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/cpuidle/governors/ladder.c | 3 +--
>>>   drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c   | 4 +---
>>>   kernel/sched/idle.c                | 3 ++-
>>>   3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/ladder.c
>>> b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/ladder.c
>>> index fb396d6..c0b36a8 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/ladder.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/ladder.c
>>> @@ -165,8 +165,7 @@ static int ladder_enable_device(struct
>>> cpuidle_driver *drv,
>>>   static void ladder_reflect(struct cpuidle_device *dev, int index)
>>>   {
>>>          struct ladder_device *ldev = &__get_cpu_var(ladder_devices);
>>> -       if (index > 0)
>>> -               ldev->last_state_idx = index;
>>> +       ldev->last_state_idx = index;
>>>   }
>>>
>>>   static struct cpuidle_governor ladder_governor = {
>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
>>> b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
>>> index a17515f..3907301 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
>>> @@ -365,9 +365,7 @@ static int menu_select(struct cpuidle_driver
>>> *drv, struct cpuidle_device *dev,
>>>   static void menu_reflect(struct cpuidle_device *dev, int index)
>>>   {
>>>          struct menu_device *data = &__get_cpu_var(menu_devices);
>>> -       data->last_state_idx = index;
>>> -       if (index >= 0)
>>> -               data->needs_update = 1;
>>> +       data->needs_update = 1;
>>
>> Why is the last_state_idx not getting updated ?
> 
> Oups, right. This is missing.
> 
> Thanks for pointing this out.
> 
> By the way, I don't think a back end driver is changing the selected
> state currently and I am not sure this is desirable since we want to
> trust the state we are going (as a best effort). So if the 'enter'
> function does not change the index, that means the last_state_idx has
> not to be changed since it has been assigned in the 'select' function.

Hmm Right. So you might want to remove the last_state_idx update in
ladder_reflect() also?

Regards
Preeti U Murthy
> 
> 
> 

--
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/