linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] maximum latency tracking infrastructure (version 3)

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, 28 Aug 2006 18:19:27 +0200
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Andreas Mohr <andi@...x01.fht-esslingen.de>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...l.org, mingo@...e.hu,
	jesse.barnes@...el.com, dwalker@...sta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] maximum latency tracking infrastructure (version 3)

Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 05:48:00PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> The proposed solution is to have an interface where drivers can
>> * announce the maximum latency (in microseconds) that they can deal with
>> * modify this latency
>> * give up their constraint
>> and a function where the code that decides on power saving strategy can query
>> the current global desired maximum.
> 
> Nifty (aka "dumb") idea: would it make sense to enable drivers to register a
> callback "we're going to go idle now" to e.g. let a driver refill or
> service its hardware buffers the very moment before idling? 

I could have sworn there was an idle call notifier already\

ah there is on x86-64 but it is architecture specific...
-
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/