linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: longhaul: Set transition_delay

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: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1712070925450.25092@math.ut.ee>
Date:   Thu, 7 Dec 2017 09:26:31 +0200 (EET)
From:   Meelis Roos <mroos@...ux.ee>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        "4 . 14+" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: longhaul: Set transition_delay_us to 20 ms

> On 06-12-17, 20:21, Meelis Roos wrote:
> > 30000 was not reliable.
> > 
> > I created root cron job
> > @reboot sleep 120; /sbin/reboot
> > 
> > and by the evening it was dead again.
> > 
> > Will try 50000 tomorrow.
> 
> Lets make it similar to what it was before my original patch modified
> it, to avoid all corner cases.
> 
> Please test against 200 ms, 200000 value here.

Sorry, I confused 200000 vs 20000, will test 200000.

But 200000 was the value before. Shall I test 200000 with or without 
the other limiting patch?

-- 
Meelis Roos (mroos@...ux.ee)