linux-kernel - Re: [patch 08/34] arm: Use generic idle loop

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: <20130408214719.GN17995@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 8 Apr 2013 22:47:19 +0100
From:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 08/34] arm: Use generic idle loop

On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 03:02:39PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:31:20PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Fri, 22 Mar 2013, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hi Thomas,
> > > > 
> > > > Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> writes:
> > > > 
> > > > > Use the generic idle loop and replace enable/disable_hlt with the
> > > > > respective core functions.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> > > > > Cc: Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
> > > > 
> > > > I gave patches 1-5 + this a quick spin on ARM (specifially some OMAP3 and
> > > > OMAP4 platforms, with and without CPUidle enabled.)
> > > > 
> > > > The OMAP stuff needed a couple minor compile fixes (below), but
> > > > otherwise it passes the quick "seems to work" test.
> > > 
> > > Yeah, that's needed for the other arch/arm conversions as well.
> > 
> > So, the only patch I got was this one, which is useless to test on its
> > own...
> 
> I'm testing V2 now and will post an git URL with a testing branch
> later tonight.

So, how can I review these changes when all there is is a git URL, and
I *do* not want to pull them into my tree without first looking at the
patches, possibly reviewing them and *replying* with the patch inline?

I see you've now added this stuff to -tip.  I guess ARM doesn't matter
to you at all.  I guess having ARM people review the core changes doesn't
matter either.

Well, I guess if it's broken, we'll just have to fix it up after the
merge window.

One rule for x86, a different one for ARM.  Let x86 maintainers moan
about ARM people, but don't let ARM people moan about x86 maintainers.
Yes, sure, right, I get it.

So, explicitly, my concern is this replacement of enable_hlt()/disable_hlt()
with this cpu_idle_poll_ctrl(), and whether this interface is still
counted - so that it's possible to call disable_hlt() to _permanently_
disable any hlt-based idle loop.

If that's not possible with your revised interface, you have just broken
some ARM platforms.  I can only guess... because you never copied your
entire patch set to me nor to the ARM lists.
--
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/