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: <CAJZ5v0iPt8VKoM8BuRA7O+U+fk7dg37sqVJ0pi2=S8muqfznPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 11 Nov 2017 00:09:18 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        WANG Chao <chao.wang@...oud.cn>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
        Mathias Krause <minipli@...glemail.com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: use cpufreq_quick_get() for /proc/cpuinfo "cpu MHz" again

On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> c_start() can run aperfmperf_snapshot_khz() on all CPUs upfront (say
>> in parallel), then wait for a while (say 5 ms; the current 20 ms wait
>> is overkill) and then aperfmperf_snapshot_khz() can be run once on
>> each CPU in show_cpuinfo() without taking the "stale cache" threshold
>> into account.
>
> Yeah, that won't work.

Indeed.

> What could work is to do that "smp_call_function_many()" at open time,
> and *not* set the "wait" flag, but do it entirely asynchronously.

Right.

> But I don't think that's an option for 4.14 ;(

Agreed.

> So I guess I'll have to revert.

Sure thing (and I see that you've reverted it already).

The reason why I wanted to fix this up before the final 4.14 is that
the "cpu MHz" behavior is kind of inconsistent now (generally, it is
either constant or the last requested frequency depending on the
cpufreq configuration), but that's not a blocker by any measure IMO.

Anyway, I'll try to come up with something better next week.

Thanks,
Rafael

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ