linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8 v2] acpi-cpufreq: Move modern AMD cpufreq support to acpi-cpufreq

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: <201209051546.22590.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Wed, 5 Sep 2012 15:46:22 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>
Cc:	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>, Matthew Garret <mjg@...hat.com>,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, cpufreq@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8 v2] acpi-cpufreq: Move modern AMD cpufreq support to acpi-cpufreq

On Tuesday, September 04, 2012, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> now the second, revised version of the patch set. I now tested loading
> both drivers after each other in several combinations, after two bug
> fixes this now works as expected.
> I added a patch to move messages from powernow-k8 after the initialization
> phase, so it remains silent if driver loading fails.
> 
> I also rearranged the patches so that the powernow-k8 feature removal patch is
> now the last one and is somewhat optional. I still prefer to have it in,
> but it can be dropped if needed. Then powernow-k8 will still support modern
> AMD CPUs, but will emit a warning message.
> 
> Regards,
> Andre
> 
> Changes from v1:
> * added hints to Kconfig about CPU support
> * merge documentation from separate patch into the feature patch
> * add deprecation warning
> * prefix acpi-cpufreq warning messages with module name
> * bugfix: avoid boost init it driver registration failed
> * bugfix: fix module redirect request call (was not reached before)

I have applied the whole series to the linux-next branch of the linux-pm.git
tree, but I'm quite unsure about [7/8].  Is it really necessary?  I mean, since
we want users to switch to a different driver anyway, which already has a knob
providing the functionality in question, what's the point really?

Rafael
--
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/