linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/6 v4] cpufreq: tolerate inexact values when collecting stats

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:	Tue, 13 Nov 2012 10:33:49 -0600
From:	Mark Langsdorf <mark.langsdorf@...xeda.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6 v4] cpufreq: tolerate inexact values when collecting
 stats

On 11/13/2012 10:24 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:35:49AM -0600, Mark Langsdorf wrote:
>> The function is buried pretty deep in the cpufreq_stat code. It didn't
>> seem appropriate to make it a function pointer as part of struct
>> cpufreq_driver.
> 
> Right, what's cpufreq-speak for
> 
> 	if (Calxeda)
> 		shift by 10
> 
> ?
> 
> Better yet, add a flag or a bitfield called "minimize_jitter" or similar
> and set it only on your hardware...

Doing it in two passes has a similar effect: systems that have exact
frequencies will get caught in the first pass when the values match. But
adding a flag makes sense.

--Mark Langsdorf
Calxeda, Inc.

--
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/