linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Restore policy min/max limits on CPU online

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:   Fri, 17 Mar 2017 18:40:29 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Restore policy min/max limits on CPU online

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 5:43 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> On 17 March 2017 at 22:01, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>> IMO if we are not going to restore the governor, we also should not
>> restore the limits as those things are related.  Now, the governor can
>> be unloaded while the CPU is offline.
>
> I thought about it earlier but then governor and policy min/max
> looked independent to me. Why do you think they are related?

They are parts of one set of settings.

If the governor is not restored, the policy starts with the default
one, so why would it not start with the default limits then?

My opinion is that either we restore everything the way it was, or we
start afresh entirely.

Thanks,
Rafael