linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 2/2] turbostat, add set_base

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:	Fri, 22 May 2015 15:55:15 +0000
From:	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>
To:	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	"Semin, Andrey" <andrey.semin@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] turbostat, add set_base_cpu()

> +void set_base_cpu(void)
> +{
> +	int cpu;
> +
> +	for (cpu = 0; cpu <= topo.max_cpu_num; ++cpu) {
> +		if (cpu_is_not_present(cpu))
> +			continue;
> +		base_cpu = cpu;
> +		break;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (base_cpu == -1)
> +		err(-ENODEV, "No valid cpus found");
> +}

cpu0 hard-coding is indeed arbitrary.
However, so is this proposed replacement, base_cpu.
Either may not match where turbostat is currently running,
and thus could provoke unnecessary cross-calls to get there.

I think it would be better to ask getcpu(2) where we are already running,
and simply use that one.  I think we can call it once and cache it,
as you proposed, rather than multiple system calls.

thanks,
-Len

ps. patches to turbostat should go to linux-pm@...r.kernel.org

--
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/