linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 5/8] cpufreq:boost:Kconfig: Provide support for software managed BOOST

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:	Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:28:02 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
	Eduardo Valentin <eduardo.valentin@...com>,
	"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jonghwa Lee <jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com>,
	Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...ess.pl>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>, durgadoss.r@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/8] cpufreq:boost:Kconfig: Provide support for
 software managed BOOST

On 26 July 2013 16:51, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 15:54:56 +0530 Viresh Kumar wrote,
>> On 25 July 2013 22:03, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com> wrote:

>> > +config CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW
>> > +       bool
>>
>> Invisible is fine but this must be disabled by default and must
>> depend on thermal, rather than moving dependency on platform's
>> config.
>
> The CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW [1] is a generic flag (invisible).
>
> I will add "default n" to it.

Leave it.. We don't need it now.. that's how these kind of config options
are defined as they are disabled by default.

> Depending only on [3], results at situation where SW BOOST can be
> enabled at x86 or ARM target with only generic THERMAL support (which
> doesn't protect from overheating).

I had a similar concern.. Currently also we aren't stopping anybody to
enable boost. By selecting thermal from CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW, atleast
we are communicating this very well to developers that they need
something else as well. And currently we only have thermal as a source
for telling when to block boost but it can be something else too..

I never said, don't use EXYNOS_THERMAL, its good to have a
dependency on it in the Exynos specific config for boost, but I wanted
normal sw boost also to depend on thermal..
--
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/