linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: twd: Adjust localtimer frequency withcpufreqnotifiers

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:	Mon, 16 May 2011 16:44:06 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>
cc:	Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Srinidhi KASAGAR <srinidhi.kasagar@...ricsson.com>,
	Harald Gustafsson <harald.gustafsson@...csson.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rickard ANDERSSON <rickard.andersson@...ricsson.com>,
	martin persson <martin.persson@...ricsson.com>,
	Varun Swara <Varun.Swara@....com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: twd: Adjust localtimer frequency
 withcpufreqnotifiers

On Mon, 16 May 2011, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> On 5/14/2011 9:21 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Just for my understanding, the clockevents_reconfigure() needs to
> be called with interrupts disabled on that CPU as part of
> the CPUFREQ notifiers. I assume the right place is do it
> in POST notifier after the CPU clock and hence TWD clock is
> updated. Is that right ?

Yes.
 
> Since there is need to call this API in interrupt
> disable context, does it make sense to take care of it
> inside the API itself instead of relying on caller fn ?

Hmm, no strong opinion
 
> The arch's where the per CPU TWD's share clock, per-cpu
> clock-events should be reconfigured on all CPUs, whenever
> the parent(CPU) clock has changed using some thing like
> smp_call_function_any() etc. Is that right understanding?

Yes. If that's a common requirement we should move that to core code.
 
Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/