linux-kernel - [PATCH 5/6] thermal: Only set passive

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, 26 Aug 2009 18:17:24 +0200
From:	Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>
To:	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>, Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>,
	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>
Subject: [PATCH 5/6] thermal: Only set passive_delay for forced passive cooling

Setting polling_delay is useless as passive_delay has priority,
so the value shown in proc isn't the actual polling delay. It
also gives the impression to the user that he can change the
polling interval through proc, while in fact he can't.

Also, unset passive_delay when the forced passive trip point is
unbound to allow polling to be disabled.

Signed-off-by: Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>
Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
Cc: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>
---

I'm not sure why polling_delay was getting set here. Possibly the
intention was to set polling_frequency instead, which is in deci-
seconds and would thus explain the factor 10 between the values.
But even for polling_frequency there is IMO no reason to set it.

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/thermal_sys.c b/drivers/thermal/thermal_sys.c
index 2d13d0d..ceda0f1 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/thermal_sys.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/thermal_sys.c
@@ -241,6 +241,8 @@ passive_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
 								 cdev);
 		}
 		mutex_unlock(&thermal_list_lock);
+		if (!tz->passive_delay)
+			tz->passive_delay = 1000;
 	} else if (!state && tz->forced_passive) {
 		mutex_lock(&thermal_list_lock);
 		list_for_each_entry(cdev, &thermal_cdev_list, node) {
@@ -251,17 +253,12 @@ passive_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
 								   cdev);
 		}
 		mutex_unlock(&thermal_list_lock);
+		tz->passive_delay = 0;
 	}
 
 	tz->tc1 = 1;
 	tz->tc2 = 1;
 
-	if (!tz->passive_delay)
-		tz->passive_delay = 1000;
-
-	if (!tz->polling_delay)
-		tz->polling_delay = 10000;
-
 	tz->forced_passive = state;
 
 	thermal_zone_device_update(tz);
--
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/