linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] CPUFreq PowerOP integration, Centrino PM Core and OPs registration 2/3

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:	Fri, 6 Oct 2006 23:19:10 -0400
From:	Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
To:	"Eugeny S. Mints" <eugeny.mints@...il.com>
Cc:	pm list <linux-pm@...ts.osdl.org>,
	Matthew Locke <matt@...adgs.com>,
	Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...ia.com>,
	Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...ia.com>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] CPUFreq PowerOP integration, Centrino PM Core and OPs registration 2/3

Hi,

On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 06:50:02PM +0400, Eugeny S. Mints wrote:

> +static int 
> +process_pwr_param(struct pm_core_point *opt, int op, char *param_name,
> +		  int va_arg)
> +{
> +	int cpu = 0;
> +	char buf[8];
> +
> +	for (cpu = 0; cpu < NR_CPUS; cpu++)
> +	{
> +		sprintf(buf, "v%d", cpu);
> +
> +		if (strcmp(param_name, buf) == 0) {
> +			if (op == PWR_PARAM_SET)
> +				opt->opt[cpu].pwpr[_I386_PM_CORE_POINT_V] = 
> +									va_arg;
> +			else if (opt != NULL)
> +				*(int *)va_arg = 
> +				     opt->opt[cpu].pwpr[_I386_PM_CORE_POINT_V];
> +			else if ((*(int *)va_arg = get_vtg(cpu)) <= 0)
> +				return -EINVAL;
> +			return 0;
> +		}
> +
> +		sprintf(buf, "freq%d", cpu);
> +
> +		if (strcmp(param_name, buf) == 0) {
> +			if (op == PWR_PARAM_SET)
> +				opt->opt[cpu].pwpr[_I386_PM_CORE_POINT_FREQ] = 
> +									va_arg;
> +			else if (opt != NULL)
> +				*(int *)va_arg = 
> +				  opt->opt[cpu].pwpr[_I386_PM_CORE_POINT_FREQ];
> +			else if ((*(int *)va_arg = get_freq(cpu)) <= 0)
> +				return -EINVAL;
> +
> +			return 0;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	return -EINVAL;
> +}

Ouch. IIRC Pavel had some fine comments about such string parsing deep in
arch code... Other than that I see lots of indirection, lots of code being
added (~400 lines) for no gain in functionality for the x86 case.

Thanks,
	Dominik
-
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/