linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] thermal/intel_powerclamp: convert to smpboot thread

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:	Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:21:42 +0200
From:	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rt@...utronix.de,
	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
	Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	"Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] thermal/intel_powerclamp: convert to smpboot thread

On Mon 2016-04-11 18:04:37, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 04/11/2016 05:19 PM, Jacob Pan wrote:
> >>>> I tried to convert it over to smpboot thread so we don't have that
> >>>> CPU notifier stuff to fire the cpu threads during hotplug events.
> >>>>
> >>> there is another patchset to convert it to kthread worker. any
> >>> advantage of smpboot thread?
> >>> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/144964
> >>
> >> It partly does the same thing except you still have your hotplug
> >> notifier which I wanted to get rid off. However it looks better than
> >> before.
> >> If you do prefer the kworker thingy then please switch from CPU_DEAD
> >> to CPU_DOWN_PREPARE (and add CPU_DOWN_FAILED to CPU_ONLINE).
> >> With those changes I should have no further problem with it :)
> >> Any ETA for (either of those patches) upstream?

It depends on some improvements of the kthread worker API. I hope
that we are getting close. I would like to send another iteration
later this week.

Best Regards,
Petr

> > +Petr
> > I do prefer not to keep track of CPU hotplug events. Let me do some
> > testing.
> Okay. Please keep me posted where you stand on this. If you go for the
> kwork series then I will try to make a patch which replaces CPU_DEAD to
> CPU_DOWN_PREPARE in order to make it symmetrical (and from what it
> looks, there is no need to run at CPU_DEAD time).