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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 01:12:04 +0200 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> To: markgross@...gnar.org Cc: Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, ACPI Devel Mailing List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>, Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@...ux.intel.com>, Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@...el.com>, Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>, Jean Pihet <j-pihet@...com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] PM / QoS: Prepare device structure for adding more constraint types On Tuesday 09 of October 2012 20:15:47 mark gross wrote: > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 10:04:03AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com> > > > > Currently struct dev_pm_info contains only one PM QoS constraints > > pointer reserved for latency requirements. Since one more device > > constraints type (i.e. flags) will be necessary, introduce a new > > structure, struct dev_pm_qos, that eventually will contain all of > > the available device PM QoS constraints and replace the "constraints" > > pointer in struct dev_pm_info with a pointer to the new structure > > called "qos". > > > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com> > > Reviewed-by: Jean Pihet <j-pihet@...com> > > --- > > drivers/base/power/qos.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- > > include/linux/pm.h | 2 +- > > include/linux/pm_qos.h | 4 ++++ > > 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) > > > > Index: linux/include/linux/pm.h > > =================================================================== > > --- linux.orig/include/linux/pm.h > > +++ linux/include/linux/pm.h > > @@ -551,7 +551,7 @@ struct dev_pm_info { > > struct dev_pm_qos_request *pq_req; > > #endif > > struct pm_subsys_data *subsys_data; /* Owned by the subsystem. */ > > - struct pm_qos_constraints *constraints; > > + struct dev_pm_qos *qos; > > }; > > > > extern void update_pm_runtime_accounting(struct device *dev); > > Index: linux/include/linux/pm_qos.h > > =================================================================== > > --- linux.orig/include/linux/pm_qos.h > > +++ linux/include/linux/pm_qos.h > > @@ -57,6 +57,10 @@ struct pm_qos_constraints { > > struct blocking_notifier_head *notifiers; > > }; > > > > +struct dev_pm_qos { > > + struct pm_qos_constraints latency; > What about non-latency constraints? This pretty much makes it explicit > that dev_pm_qos is all about latency. from the commit comment I thought > you where trying to make it more genaric. Why not call "latency" > "constraint" or something less specific? Please see the next patches in the series that add one more constraint type. Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists