linux-kernel - Re: remove cpu hotplug bustification in cpufreq.

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607251355080.29649@g5.osdl.org>
Date:	Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:57:16 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@...puserve.com>,
	Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: remove cpu hotplug bustification in cpufreq.



On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>
> so cpufreq_set_policy() takes policy->lock, and then calls into the
> userspace governer code
> (__cpufreq_set_policy->cpufreq_governor->cpufreq_governor_userspace)
> which calls __cpufreq_driver_target... which does lock_cpu_hotplug().

Yeah. I think the target should _not_ take the lock_cpu_hotplug(), since 
the call chain (much much earlier) should have done it. 

Ie we should probably do it at the "cpufreq_set_policy()" level.

>      Arjan -- who's just cleaned Linus' wall to prepare it for more head
> banging

It's not actually "my wall". I'll happily share it with anybody else.

Please. Take my wall.

		Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/