linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3] Fix problem with cpufreq_ondemand or 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <2552356.7364PTaAEG@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2012 22:54:23 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
Cc:	fabio.baltieri@...aro.org, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] Fix problem with cpufreq_ondemand or cpufreq_conservative

On Saturday, December 29, 2012 11:24:45 AM Larry Finger wrote:
> On 12/29/2012 07:27 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, December 28, 2012 07:55:20 PM Larry Finger wrote:
> >> Since commit 2aacdff entitled "cpufreq: Move common part from governors
> >> to separate file", whenever the drivers that depend on this new file
> >> (cpufreq_ondemand or cpufreq_conservative) are built as modules, a new
> >> module named cpufreq_governor is created because the Makefile includes
> >> cpufreq_governor.o twice. As drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c contains no
> >> MODULE directives, the resulting module has no license specified, which
> >> results in logging of a "module license 'unspecified' taints kernel". In
> >> addition, a number of globals are exported GPL only, and are therefore
> >> not available. This fix establishes a new boolean configuration variable
> >> that forces cpufreq_governor.o to be linked into the kernel whenever
> >> either cpufreq_ondemand or cpufreq_conservative is selected.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
> >> ---
> >> V3 changes only Kconfig and Makefile and avoids creating a new module.
> >
> > OK, thanks for the patch!
> >
> > If you don't mind, I'll rename CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOVERNOR to
> > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_COMMON when applying it, though.
> 
> The following does the job and is somewhat cleaner. If you want, I can remove 
> the line wrap and submit it as V4. The downside of this approach is that the 
> nested ifs will get cumbersome is more governors need cpufreq_governor.o.

I actually prefer the Kconfig-based one.  The extra config option is not
a problem to me.

Thanks,
Rafael


> Index: wireless-testing-new/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
> ===================================================================
> --- wireless-testing-new.orig/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
> +++ wireless-testing-new/drivers/cpufreq/Makefile
> @@ -7,8 +7,15 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT)
>   obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_PERFORMANCE) += cpufreq_performance.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_POWERSAVE)   += cpufreq_powersave.o
>   obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_USERSPACE)   += cpufreq_userspace.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_ONDEMAND)    += cpufreq_ondemand.o cpufreq_governor.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_CONSERVATIVE)        += cpufreq_conservative.o 
> cpufreq_governor.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_ONDEMAND)    += cpufreq_ondemand.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_CONSERVATIVE)        += cpufreq_conservative.o
> +ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_ONDEMAND
> +  obj-y += cpufreq_governor.o
> +else
> +  ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_CONSERVATIVE
> +    obj-y += cpufreq_governor.o
> +  endif
> +endif
> 
>   # CPUfreq cross-arch helpers
>   obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_TABLE)           += freq_table.o
> 
> 
-- 
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/