linux-kernel - Re: [RFT][PATCH v2 0/2] PM / QoS: Device resume latency framework fix

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: <CAMuHMdU-BMmznrtR6S+uppWdsiXjWZKwQYemb+_q89r852KFjg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 6 Nov 2017 14:46:48 +0100
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:     Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>,
        Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
        Ramesh Thomas <ramesh.thomas@...el.com>,
        Alex Shi <alex.shi@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFT][PATCH v2 0/2] PM / QoS: Device resume latency framework fix

Hi Rafael,

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
> On Thursday, November 2, 2017 12:00:27 AM CET Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> This series is a replacement for commit 0cc2b4e5a020 (PM / QoS: Fix device
>> resume latency PM QoS) that had to be reverted due to problems introduced by it.
>>
>> This time the genpd PM QoS governor is first updated to be more consistent
>> and the PM QoS changes are made on top of that which simplifies the second
>> patch quite a bit.
>>
>> This is based on the linux-next branch from linux-pm.git as of now (should
>> also apply to the current mainline just fine).
>>
>> Please test if you can or let me know if you have any comments.
>
> The v2 removes a couple of redundant checks from the first patch (and add
> comments to explain why the checks are not needed) and fixes up the
> "no constraint" value collision with a valid constraint multiplied by
> NSEC_PER_USEC in the second patch.
>
> Please test if possible and let me know about any issues.

With this series, the 3 issues I reported before do not happen.

Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>

Thank you.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds