linux-kernel - Re: Update the maximum depth of C-state from 6 to 9

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <15d24a2e-6e66-9aea-8bc9-5cd6e5845450@intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:57:37 +0800
From:	"baolex.ni" <baolex.ni@...el.com>
To:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	chuansheng.liu@...el.com
Subject: Re: Update the maximum depth of C-state from 6 to 9

Hi Jon,

This patch is an old one, we have corrected some minor issues on the newer one.
Please only review the newest version from my last mail with this subject
"[PATCH] ACPI: Update the maximum depth of C-state from 6 to 9".
And I also attached it to this mail.

Thanks,
Baole

On 7/11/2016 6:37 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 09:55:10 +0800
> "baolex.ni" <baolex.ni@...el.com> wrote:
> 
>> Currently, CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX has been defined as 10 in the cpuidle head file,
>> and max_cstate = CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX – 1, so 9 is the right maximum depth of C-state.
>> This change is reflected in one place of the kernel-param file,
>> but not in the other place where I suggest changing.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chuansheng Liu <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com>
> 
> So why are there two signoffs on a single-line patch?  Which one of you
> is the actual author?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> jon
> 

View attachment "0001-Update-the-maximum-depth-of-C-state-from-6-to-9.patch" of type "text/plain" (1330 bytes)