linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Don't send callback pointer to cpufreq_add_update_util

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: <2692371.TLU4a4PDeX@aspire.rjw.lan>
Date:   Thu, 17 Aug 2017 17:31:38 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:     Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Don't send callback pointer to cpufreq_add_update_util_hook()

On Thursday, August 17, 2017 2:04:48 PM CEST Viresh Kumar wrote:
> The callers already have the structure (struct update_util_data) where
> the function pointer is saved by cpufreq_add_update_util_hook(). And its
> better if the callers fill it themselves, as they can do it from the
> governor->init() callback then, which is called only once per policy
> lifetime rather than doing it from governor->start which can get called
> multiple times.

So what problem exactly is this addressing?

Thanks,
Rafael