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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 10:16:16 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, rjw@...ysocki.net Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, arm-soc <arm@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: defconfig: Select schedutil as default cpufreq governor On 21-12-17, 16:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 5:29 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote: > > On 15-12-17, 15:50, Catalin Marinas wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:51:36AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > >> > Currently performance governor is getting selected by default, which is > >> > surely not a very good choice as its pretty much power hungry. > >> > > >> > Select schedutil instead. > >> > >> And why do we care about this in defconfig? People deploying their own > >> kernels in mobile may opt for this config, others may prefer the default > >> governor. > >> > >> Also it seems it would be the only architecture make this governor the > >> default, so NAK. > > > > This is a bit dangerous configuration IMHO. > > > > Other architectures have some *real* governor selected by default, like Ondemand > > or Conservative. Running your CPUs at max (because of the default performance > > governor in arm64 config) may end up burning some SoCs accidentally just because > > their thermal stuff doesn't kick in to cool SoC down properly. > > > > So, we should have one of ondemand, conservative and schedutil selected by > > default for arm64 as well IMO and schedutil is the one which every one is > > falling back to now a days, even android. > > Maybe it's time to change the global 'default > CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE' instead to avoid having to > do this for each architecture separately? > > I think the general idea of using schedutil or ondemand instead of performance > makes sense, but it doesn't feel right to have to do this for every > single defconfig > that doesn't select a default. +Rafael to see what his views are on this. -- viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists