linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH 3/3] adjust cpu power for secondary threads on POWER6

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:	Wed, 18 Jun 2008 21:58:59 -0500
From:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:	Nathan Lynch <ntl@...ox.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 3/3] adjust cpu power for secondary threads on POWER6

Hi,

> +static unsigned int pseries_cpu_power(int cpu, unsigned int  
> default_power)
> +{
> +	struct device_node *np;
> +	unsigned int thread, power;
> +
> +	if (!cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ASYM_POWER))
> +		return default_power;
> +
> +	power = default_power;

Why not just NULL out the cpu_power function pointers on platforms  
that don't have the feature bit instead? (or the other way around:  
NULL by default, and set only on platforms that have imbalanced threads.

It'd be even nicer to do so without using up a cpu feature bit, since  
it'd then only be used in determining whether to set the ppc_md  
function pointer or not, but I don't know if there's a convenient way  
to probe for this at runtime (cpu device tree node properties?).

-Olof

--
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/