linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 4/9] PM / QOS: Add DEV_PM_QOS

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 20 Apr 2017 10:04:02 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
        "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
        Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@...aro.org>,
        Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 4/9] PM / QOS: Add DEV_PM_QOS_PERFORMANCE request

On 19-04-17, 16:07, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On 20 March 2017 at 10:32, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> > @@ -571,6 +589,9 @@ static void __dev_pm_qos_drop_user_request(struct device *dev,
> >                 req = dev->power.qos->flags_req;
> >                 dev->power.qos->flags_req = NULL;
> >                 break;
> > +       case DEV_PM_QOS_PERFORMANCE:
> > +               dev_err(dev, "Invalid user request (performance)\n");
> > +               return;
> 
> Isn't it possible to drop a performance request?

I am not exposing the performance QOS via sysfs. Should we ? I thought
this has to be worked out within kernel only and so haven't provided
any user interface.

> > @@ -96,9 +98,11 @@ struct pm_qos_flags {
> >  struct dev_pm_qos {
> >         struct pm_qos_constraints resume_latency;
> >         struct pm_qos_constraints latency_tolerance;
> > +       struct pm_qos_constraints performance;
> >         struct pm_qos_flags flags;
> >         struct dev_pm_qos_request *resume_latency_req;
> >         struct dev_pm_qos_request *latency_tolerance_req;
> > +       struct dev_pm_qos_request *performance_req;
> 
> I didn't find performance_req being used at all...

I just over-copied it seems. The OPP framework creates its own request
structure and so this should be dropped.

-- 
viresh