linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] intel_pstate updates for v3.14-rcX

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: <4187014.8zm183CESa@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Wed, 19 Feb 2014 01:34:35 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@...il.com>
Cc:	dirk.j.brandewie@...el.com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] intel_pstate updates for v3.14-rcX

On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 03:53:48 PM Dirk Brandewie wrote:
> On 02/18/2014 02:27 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 12:29:54 PM Dirk Brandewie wrote:
> >> Hi Rafael,
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >> On 02/12/2014 10:01 AM, dirk.brandewie@...il.com wrote:
> >>> From: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.j.brandewie@...el.com>
> >>>
> >>> Based on v3.14-rc2
> >>>
> >>> Patch 1 removes energy reporting the patch from Maurizio Lambardi
> >>>    intel_pstate: fix race condition in intel_pstate_init() can be dropped.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Any reason why patches 2-5 did not make rc3 other than timing?
> >>
> >> Patches 2/3 can easily wait for v3.15.x
> >>
> >> Patches 4/5 fix bugs that are in the wild.
> >
> > I asked you about them, but you didn't reply:
> >
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-pm&m=139225158531023&w=4
> >
> > Again, do patches [4-5/5] depend on [2-3/5]?
> >
> > If not, I can queue them up for -rc4.
> 
> All the patches are independent of one another.
> 
> Patch 2 is straight cleanup no functional change but reduces the memory
> footprint slightly.
> 
> Patch 3 is a bug that will only be seen when the PID is reset at init time
> or when a change is made to PID params via debugfs.  The problem will only
> exist for one sample time since it is setting last_err in the PID.
> 
> Patch 4-5 are bugs found during Baytrail-T testing

Are there any pointers to bug reports that may be included in the changelogs
of these?

Rafael

--
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/