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: <20170710064010.GF2928@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Mon, 10 Jul 2017 12:10:10 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux@....linux.org.uk,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] cpufreq: provide data for frequency-invariant
 load-tracking support

On 07-07-17, 17:01, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 9bf97a366029..77c4d5e7a598 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -301,6 +301,12 @@ static void adjust_jiffies(unsigned long val, struct cpufreq_freqs *ci)
>  #endif
>  }
>  
> +#ifndef arch_set_freq_scale
> +static void arch_set_freq_scale(struct cpumask *cpus, unsigned long cur_freq,
> +                               unsigned long max_freq)
> +{}
> +#endif
> +
>  static void __cpufreq_notify_transition(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>                 struct cpufreq_freqs *freqs, unsigned int state)
>  {
> @@ -343,6 +349,8 @@ static void __cpufreq_notify_transition(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>                                 CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE, freqs);
>                 if (likely(policy) && likely(policy->cpu == freqs->cpu))
>                         policy->cur = freqs->new;
> +               arch_set_freq_scale(policy->related_cpus, policy->cur,
> +                                   policy->cpuinfo.max_freq);

This function gets called for-each-cpu-in-policy, so you don't need the first
argument. And the topology code already has max_freq, so not sure if you need
the last parameter as well, specially for the ARM solution.

-- 
viresh

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ