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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 12:01:41 -0700 From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com> To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>, Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, jolsa@...hat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/10] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Use CPPC to get max performance On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 20:56 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016, Tim Chen wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2016-09-21 at 22:30 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > > My current understanding is that we need to rebuild sched domains > > > after setting the priorities, > > No, that's not true. We need to rebuild the sched domains only > > when the sched domain flags are changed, not when we are changing > > the priorities. Only the sched domain flag is a property of > > the sched domain. CPU priority values are not part of sched domain. > > > > Morten had similar question about whether we need to rebuild sched domain > > when we change cpu priorities when we first post the patches. > > Peter has explained that it wasn't necessary. > > http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1608.3/01753.html > And why is there no explanation in form of a comment in the code? Sure, I'll add a comment. Thanks. Tim
Powered by blists - more mailing lists