linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/1] ARM: print MHz in /proc/cpuinfo

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:02:37 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Jon Masters <jcm@...masters.org>,
	Jon Mason <jon.mason@...adcom.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/1] ARM: print MHz in /proc/cpuinfo

On Sun 2016-07-03 17:54:31, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 02, 2016 at 07:58:00PM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> > Agreed. But we'll still be coming back to ensure this information is
> > presented to users. I pointed out to ARM about 3-4 years ago that this
> > was going to bite us. It is now biting us, and we will ensure that
> > useless data is provided where it is on x86 for identical experience by
> > users. That is unless or until x86 users do something else always. Our
> > (separate) case will use DMI or ACPI for the same kind of data.
> 
> Right, so having read all your email, there's no reason why we couldn't
> just print:
> 
> cpu MHz  : 99999999.999

You apparenly did not read the email. Because bogus number will not
help people detecting underclocked configurations, as email was
explaining.

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html