linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/11] acpi: cppc: Allow build with ACPI_CPU_FREQ

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: <18399184.AAFNDR2hqb@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:   Sat, 20 Aug 2016 02:46:06 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:     Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, x86@...nel.org, bp@...e.de,
        sudeep.holla@....com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        alexey.klimov@....com, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        lenb@...nel.org, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com,
        paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
        mcgrof@...nel.org, jgross@...e.com, robert.moore@...el.com,
        dvyukov@...gle.com, jeyu@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] acpi: cppc: Allow build with ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS config

On Thursday, August 18, 2016 03:36:46 PM Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> Some newer x86 platforms have support for both _CPC and _PSS object. So
> kernel config can have both ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS and ACPI_CPPC_LIB. So remove
> restriction for ACPI_CPPC_LIB to build only when ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS is not
> defined.
> Also for legacy systems with only _PSS, we shouldn't bail out if
> acpi_cppc_processor_probe() fails, if ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS is also defined.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/Kconfig            | 1 -
>  drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 5 ++++-
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> index 445ce28..c6bb6aa 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> @@ -227,7 +227,6 @@ config ACPI_MCFG
>  config ACPI_CPPC_LIB
>  	bool
>  	depends on ACPI_PROCESSOR
> -	depends on !ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS
>  	select MAILBOX
>  	select PCC
>  	help
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> index 0553aee..0e0b629 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> @@ -245,8 +245,11 @@ static int __acpi_processor_start(struct acpi_device *device)
>  		return 0;
>  
>  	result = acpi_cppc_processor_probe(pr);
> -	if (result)
> +	if (result) {
> +#ifndef CONFIG_ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS
>  		return -ENODEV;
> +#endif
> +	}

	if (result && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS))
		return -ENODEV;

would look better.

>  
>  	if (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == &acpi_idle_driver)
>  		acpi_processor_power_init(pr);
> 

Thanks,
Rafael