linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] PM / OPP: Add support for descending order for cpufreq table

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: <CAGo_u6o0J_T_hnmDAiYpsDxe77iKPCjuWisZJfTjYYOVGJF96A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 6 May 2014 20:00:03 -0500
From:	Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
To:	Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@...sung.com>
Cc:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PM / OPP: Add support for descending order for
 cpufreq table

On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@...sung.com> wrote:
> Hi

Please dont top post. it is usually frowned upon.

>
> My holiday is finished.
>
> I implemented another cpufreq driver. And that driver also have to use exynos_sort_descend_freq_table().
> Then exynos5440 and new cpufreq have a duplicate function.(exynos_sort_descend_freq_table().
> So I want to solve it.

As discussed in the thread, creating stuff that are common into a
common file, and even isolating this into cpufreq specific solution
might be good.

[1] now moves that entire logic of table creation to be cpufreq
specific - we could consider modifier functions to them.

In some quick tests by reversing table [2], I cant see any difference
in behavior in ascending[3] or descending[4] order of the cpufreq
table.

So, we could do [2] as default as well, if it is determined to impact
no one else making any form of assumptions on table ordering - but it
might be preferable for drivers not to depend on framework ordering of
data as things could change in the future.

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4115141/ +
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4115101/
[2] http://slexy.org/view/s21HyCUhXK
[3] http://slexy.org/view/s202xTUG59
[4] http://slexy.org/view/s20ewFa6PW

Regards,
Nishanth Menon
--
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/