linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 0/9] cpufreq: Sort policy->freq

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, 6 Jun 2016 23:09:20 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:	Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>,
	Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>,
	Steven Miao <realmz6@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/9] cpufreq: Sort policy->freq_table

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> So all my patches are contained in two series. The first one is:
>
> [PATCH V3 0/8] cpufreq: cleanups and reorganization
>
> which I have sent this morning. It does some cleanup and shall be
> applied regardless of this series.
>
> This series improves the performance of cpufreq_frequency_table_target()
> routine by storing the policy->freq_table sorted in ascending order. On
> one hand it shall improve the performance of current governors for
> drivers providing freq-table to cpufreq core and on another hand this
> API can be used directly from schedutil governor as well.
>
> As Steve has requested earlier, these APIs are moved to a .h file to
> avoid function calls.
>
> Steve's series can use this API now without any performance lag.
>
> The first 7 patches makes sure that current drivers wouldn't break because
> of reordering of policy->freq_table and the 8th patch updates cpufreq
> core to sort policy->freq_table and make
> cpufreq_frequency_table_target() much more efficient.

Is there any particular reason why patches [2-7/9] are separate?

They seem to be making analogous changes in several drivers (and even
the changelog seems to be the same), so why don't you make a single
patch out of them?