linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] CPUs capacity information for heterogeneous systems

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, 7 Dec 2015 12:36:54 +0000
From:	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	peterz@...radead.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
	robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, sudeep.holla@....com,
	lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, catalin.marinas@....com,
	will.deacon@....com, morten.rasmussen@....com,
	dietmar.eggemann@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] CPUs capacity information for heterogeneous
 systems

On 07/12/15 12:11, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 12:02:44PM +0000, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > On 23/11/15 14:28, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > 
> > Hi again everybody,
> > 
> > thanks a lot to Rob and Vincent for feedback, but, IMHO, we'd need more
> > discussion happening on this series to figure out how we move forward;
> > so, this is a ping :-).  It's a simple information that we need to figure
> > out how to provide, and in which form, but it has the potential to form
> > a standardized basis for achieving important performance benefits.
> 
> I'm happy to take the first patch, it looks like a simple clean up.
> Please arrange for it to land in my patch system.  Thanks.
> 

OK, will do. Thanks!

> It looks like the second patch doesn't yet have the backing from the DT
> people, which prevents the remainder of the patch set progressing.  That's
> the sticking point which needs to be resolved.
> 

Agreed. That is exactly the point for which I was seeking more feedback.
OTOH, 7/8 and 8/8 may potentially work without the DT bindings, as they
simply expose a sysfs attribute. If you, and others, see value in them,
I can easily put them at the top of the series and post a v2. Thoughts?

Best,

- Juri
--
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/