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  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]
Date:   Mon, 6 Aug 2018 11:37:55 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <>
To:     Ulf Hansson <>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,
        Sudeep Holla <>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <>,
        Mark Rutland <>,
        Linux PM <>,
        Kevin Hilman <>,
        Lina Iyer <>,
        Lina Iyer <>,
        Rob Herring <>,
        Daniel Lezcano <>,
        Thomas Gleixner <>,
        Vincent Guittot <>,
        Stephen Boyd <>,
        Juri Lelli <>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <>,
        Linux ARM <>,
        linux-arm-msm <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 09/26] kernel/cpu_pm: Manage runtime PM in the idle
 path for CPUs

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 1:42 PM, Ulf Hansson <> wrote:
> [...]
>>> Assuming that I have got that right, there are concerns, mostly regarding
>>> patch [07/26], but I will reply to that directly.
>> Well, I haven't got that right, so never mind.
>> There are a few minor things to address, but apart from that the general
>> genpd patches look ready.
> Alright, thanks!
> I will re-spin the series and post a new version once 4.19 rc1 is out.
> Hopefully we can queue it up early in next cycle to get it tested in
> next for a while.
>>> The $subject patch is fine by me by itself, but it obviously depends on the
>>> previous ones.  Patches [01-02/26] are fine too, but they don't seem to be
>>> particularly useful without the rest of the series.
>>> As far as patches [10-26/26] go, I'd like to see some review comments and/or
>>> tags from the people with vested interest in there, in particular from Daniel
>>> on patch [12/26] and from Sudeep on the PSCI ones.
>> But this still holds.
> Actually, patch 10 and patch11 is ready to go as well. I ping Daniel
> on patch 12.
> In regards to the rest of the series, some of the PSCI/ARM changes
> have been reviewed by Mark Rutland, however several changes have not
> been acked.
> On the other hand, one can also interpret the long silence in regards
> to PSCI/ARM changes as they are good to go. :-)

Well, in that case giving an ACK to them should not be an issue for
the people with a vested interest I suppose.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists