linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/10] mm: Linux VM Infrastructure to support Memory Power Management

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110610200233.5ddd5a31@infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 10 Jun 2011 20:02:33 -0700
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Kyungmin Park <kmpark@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ankita Garg <ankita@...ibm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, thomas.abraham@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] mm: Linux VM Infrastructure to support Memory
 Power Management

On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 12:37:13 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 08:23:29PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:47:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > 
> > > And if I understand you correctly, then the patches that Ankita
> > > posted should help your self-refresh case, along with the
> > > originally intended the power-down case and special-purpose use
> > > of memory case.
> > 
> > Yeah, I'd hope so once we actually have capable hardware.
> 
> Cool!!!
> 
> So Ankita's patchset might be useful to you at some point, then.
> 
> Does it look like a reasonable implementation?

as someone who is working on hardware that is PASR capable right now,
I have to admit that our plan was to just hook into the buddy allocator,
and use PASR on the top level of buddy (eg PASR off blocks that are
free there, and PASR them back on once an allocation required the block
to be broken up)..... that looked the very most simple to me.

Maybe something much more elaborate is needed, but I didn't see why so
far.


-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/