linux-kernel - Re: Regression on cpufreq in v3.12-rc1

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: <CAKohpo=b8WiE5kY8u4d5RDtJazR-U+NMR1jJTS85wTc9hvkGYA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 20 Sep 2013 22:24:26 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Regression on cpufreq in v3.12-rc1

On 20 September 2013 20:46, Srivatsa S. Bhat
<srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> I think show() and store() also suffer
> from a similar fate. So do you think we need to add these checks there as well?
> I'm not sure, since I can't think of a situation in which show() or store()
> can be invoked before the cpufreq-driver is registered.. or, is such a
> situation possible with cpufreq_disabled()?

cpufreq_disabled() is supposed to be called at boot time, so that
cpufreq_core_init() fails.. and so show/store wouldn't exist without
a 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/