linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add P state driver for Intel Core Processors

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: <CAOh2x=nwHbbngQm1PE7SfOLbHs3oMMb74zHXD9721OJzWo1+Tg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 14 Feb 2013 09:38:21 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@...il.com>
Cc:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add P state driver for Intel Core Processors

On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Dirk Brandewie
<dirk.brandewie@...il.com> wrote:
> For the case where both are built-in the load order works my driver uses
> device_initcall() and acpi_cpufreq uses late_initcall().
>
> For the case where both are a module (which I was sure I tested) you are
> right
> I will have to do something.
>
> For now I propose to make my driver built-in only while I sort out the right
> solution for the module build.  Does this seem reasonable to everyone?

Of-course i am missing something here. Why would anybody want to insert
acpi-cpufreq module when the system supports the pstate driver.

In case they are mutually exclusive, then we can have something like
depends on !ACPI-DRIVER in the kconfig option of pstate driver.
--
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/