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]
Date:   Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:27:52 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:     Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: cpuidle: Support asymmetric idle definition

On Thursday, June 22, 2017 02:25:19 PM Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 12/06/2017 20:49, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, June 12, 2017 05:55:10 PM Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> >> Some hardware have clusters with different idle states. The current code does
> >> not support this and fails as it expects all the idle states to be identical.
> >>
> >> Because of this, the Mediatek mtk8173 had to create the same idle state for a
> >> big.Little system and now the Hisilicon 960 is facing the same situation.
> >>
> >> Solve this by simply assuming the multiple driver will be needed for all the
> >> platforms using the ARM generic cpuidle driver which makes sense because of the
> >> different topologies we can support with a single kernel for ARM32 or ARM64.
> >>
> >> Every CPU has its own driver, so every single CPU can specify in the DT the
> >> idle states.
> >>
> >> This simple approach allows to support the future dynamIQ system, current SMP
> >> and HMP.
> >>
> >> Tested on:
> >>  - 96boards: Hikey 620
> >>  - 96boards: Hikey 960
> >>  - 96boards: dragonboard410c
> >>  - Mediatek 8173
> >>
> >> Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
> >> Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
> >> Tested-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
> > 
> > There seems to have been quite some discussion regarding this one and I'm not
> > sure about the resolution of it.
> > 
> > I'd feel more comfortable with an ACK or Reviewed-by from Sudeep or Lorenzo here.
> 
> 
> Hi Rafael,
> 
> just a gentle reminder, Sudeep acked the patch.

Yes, I'll get to it later today, most likely.

Thanks,
Rafael

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ