linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq Fixes for 3.9

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: <CAKohpokp4YrxKHibewdt+3-WF7P2Fa_bvRidHpjd9SpsT6bPpw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 8 Feb 2013 20:06:52 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	valdis.kletnieks@...edu, artem.savkov@...il.com,
	cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
	robin.randhawa@....com, Steve.Bannister@....com,
	Liviu.Dudau@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq Fixes for 3.9

On 8 February 2013 18:02, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> So as I said, please rework the fixes on top of linux-pm.git/pm-cpufreq.

I already did. Please check for-rafael branch

> Moreover, I'd very much prefer it if you fixed the problems introduced by
> b8eed8a "cpufreq: Simplify __cpufreq_remove_dev()" separately and *then* any
> other locking problems you're seeing in the code, although people are not
> reporting them.
>
> You seem to have a clear picture of how the code should work now, so that
> won't be a big trouble I guess.

For me all problems are fixed in the current code. :)
--
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/