linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH linux-next v8] cpufreq: convert the 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]

Date:	Thu, 4 Apr 2013 21:57:19 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@....com>
Cc:	rjw@...k.pl, cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next v8] cpufreq: convert the cpufreq_driver to use
 the rcu

On 4 April 2013 20:23, Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@....com> wrote:
> We eventually would like to remove the rwlock cpufreq_driver_lock or convert
> it back to a spinlock and protect the read sections with RCU.  The first step in
> that is moving the cpufreq_driver to use the rcu.
> I don't see an easy wasy to protect the cpufreq_cpu_data structure with the
> RCU, so I am leaving it with the rwlock for now since under certain configs
> __cpufreq_cpu_get is hot spot with 256+ cores.
>
> v5: Go a different way and split up the lock and use the rcu
> v6: use bools instead of checking function pointers
>     covert the cpufreq_data_lock to a rwlock
> v7: Rebase to use the already accepted half
> v8: Correct have_governor_per_policy
>     Reviewed location of rcu_read_(un)lock in several spots

Sorry for long delay or too many versions of this patch :)

Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
--
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/