| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:41:24 -0700 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...ibm.com> Cc: cpufreq@...ts.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Expose cpufreq coordination requirements regardless of coordination mechanism On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:43:54 -0700 "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...ibm.com> wrote: > Currently, affected_cpus shows which CPUs need to have their frequency > coordinated in software. When hardware coordination is in use, the > contents of this file appear the same as when no coordination is > required. This can lead to some confusion among user-space programs, > for example, that do not know that extra coordination is required to > force a CPU core to a particular speed to control power consumption. > > To fix this, create a "related_cpus" attribute that always displays > the coordination map regardless of whatever coordination strategy > the cpufreq driver uses (sw or hw). If the cpufreq driver does not > provide a value, fall back to policy->cpus. I was going to ding you for not updating the kernel->userspace API documentation. But it seems that none of this interface is documented anyway :( -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists