linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3 v3] cpufreq: governor: Replace timers with utilization update callbacks

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: <20160208115248.GC8294@vireshk>
Date:	Mon, 8 Feb 2016 17:22:48 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
	Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3 v3] cpufreq: governor: Replace timers with
 utilization update callbacks

On 08-02-16, 03:08, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Moreover, update_sampling_rate() doesn't need to walk the cpu_dbs_infos,
> it may walk policies instead.  Like after the (untested) appended patch.
> 
> Then, if we have a governor_data_lock in struct policy, we can use that
> to protect policy_dbs while it is being access there and we're done.
> 
> I'll try to prototype something along these lines tomorrow.

I have solved that in a different way, and dropped the lock from
update_sampling_rate(). Please see if that looks good.

-- 
viresh