linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/8] cpufreq: Frequency invariant scheduler load-tracking support

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:	Tue, 15 Mar 2016 22:32:53 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>
Cc:	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, rjw@...ysocki.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	Juri.Lelli@....com, steve.muckle@...aro.org,
	morten.rasmussen@....com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette+renesas@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] cpufreq: Frequency invariant scheduler load-tracking
 support

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 01:19:17PM -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
> That's what I had in mind. I guess that some day there will be a need to
> select implementations at run-time for both cpufreq (e.g. different
> cpufreq drivers might implement arch_scale_freq_capacity) and for the
> !CONFIG_CPU_FREQ case (e.g. different platforms might implement
> arch_scale_freq_capcity within the same arch).

No, no runtime selection. That gets us function pointers and other
indirect mess.

We should be trying very hard to get rid of that cpufreq_util_update()
pointer, not add more of that gunk.

Use self modifying code if you have to do something.