linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] trace power_frequency events on the correct cpu (for Intel x86 CPUs)

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]

Message-Id: <201003231757.51259.trenn@suse.de>
Date:	Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:57:51 +0100
From:	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>
To:	Robert Schöne <robert.schoene@...dresden.de>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	cpufreq <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trace power_frequency events on the correct cpu  (for Intel x86 CPUs)

On Tuesday 23 March 2010 17:28:36 Robert Schöne wrote:
> Am Montag, den 22.03.2010, 06:57 -0700 schrieb Arjan van de Ven:
> > On 3/22/2010 0:04, Robert Schöne wrote:
> > > Am Sonntag, den 21.03.2010, 17:42 -0700 schrieb Arjan van de Ven:
> > >> On 3/20/2010 14:37, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> It also seem to be (hopefully) a minor feature for timechart, so this should
> > >>> not hurt that much (yet).
> > >>
> > >> It's actually a major feature for timechart, and one of the key things I and a bunch of others
> > >> inside Intel use timechart for.
> > >>
> > > It's a major feature for us too.
> > > I suppose, the cpufreq_notify_transition calls are correct (meaning
> > > being called for all related cpus) for every driver. So there's still
> > > the option to include it in the POST_CHANGE section of this function.
> > > Could this be okay for the both of you?
> > 
> > post change would work... that gets frequency afaik..
> Are you ok with this too, Thomas?
You mean hooking it into cpufreq_stat_notifier_trans() in
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_stats.c?
That sounds like the right approach.

But what assures that this is executed on the correct cpu, which seem
to be necessary with the current trace function?

   Thomas
--
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/