linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] platform: x86: Support Turbo Boost Max 3.0 for non HWP systems

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: <1484779250.2833.34.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 18 Jan 2017 14:40:50 -0800
From:   Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        dvhart@...radead.org, andriy.shevchenko@...el.com
Cc:     platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] platform: x86: Support Turbo Boost Max 3.0 for non
 HWP systems

On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 10:29 -0800, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> 
> +
> +static int itmt_legacy_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> +	static u32 max_highest_perf = 0, min_highest_perf = U32_MAX;

Should the max_highest_perf and min_highest_perf be defined and initialized
outside this function?  Otherwise the max and min value will be lost and reset
each time a new cpu comes online.

We will always find max_highest_perf == min_highest_perf.

Tim 

> +	int priority;
> +
> +	priority = get_oc_core_priority(cpu);
> +	if (priority < 0)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	sched_set_itmt_core_prio(priority, cpu);
> +
> +	/* Enable ITMT feature when a core with different priority is found */
> +	if (max_highest_perf <= min_highest_perf) {
> +		if (priority > max_highest_perf)
> +			max_highest_perf = priority;
> +
> +		if (priority < min_highest_perf)
> +			min_highest_perf = priority;
> +
> +		if (max_highest_perf > min_highest_perf)
> +			schedule_work(&sched_itmt_work);
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +