linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 3/8] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make worker kthread be SCHED

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]

Date:   Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:57:28 -0700
From:   Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it>,
        claudio@...dence.eu.com,
        Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it>,
        bristot@...hat.com, Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>,
        Andres Oportus <andresoportus@...gle.com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 3/8] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make worker kthread
 be SCHED_DEADLINE

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:07:09 -0700
> Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com> wrote:
>
>
>> > It is rather long. Although I actually hate the SUGOV, it is easily
>> > grepable. Just comment what it stands for. We can always change it
>> > later.
>>
>> I was thinking why not just SCHED_FLAG_CPUFREQ. That says its for
>> cpufreq purposes, and is a bit self-documenting. "WORKER" is a bit
>> redundant and can be dropped in my opinion.
>
> I was thinking that too, but was wondering how tightly coupled is this
> with SCHED_DEADLINE? I like the searchability of SUGOV, where as
> CPUFREQ is still quite broad.

Yes this is tightly coupled with DL so in that case probably a more
specific name is better as you mentioned.

thanks,

-Joel