linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] arm64: Enable dynamic CPU capacity initialization

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: <20160208131320.GA7265@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 8 Feb 2016 13:13:20 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc:	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
	vincent.guittot@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
	mark.rutland@....com, linux@....linux.org.uk, sudeep.holla@....com,
	lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, catalin.marinas@....com,
	will.deacon@....com, morten.rasmussen@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] arm64: Enable dynamic CPU capacity initialization

On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 12:28:39PM +0000, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 03/02/16 11:59, Juri Lelli wrote:

> > +bool arch_wants_init_cpu_capacity(void)
> > +{
> > +	return true;

> Isn't this a little bit too simple? Not every ARM/ARM64 platform is a
> heterogeneous one.

Does it matter?  Is there any problem with doing the callibration and
having it say that all the CPUs performs very similarly?  My
understanding was that this was simply saying it was worth checking to
see if there was some asymmetry.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)