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]
Date:   Mon, 26 Nov 2018 16:06:01 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc:     rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        viresh.kumar@...aro.org, Chris Redpath <chris.redpath@...aro.org>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@...aro.org>,
        Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>,
        Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@...aro.org>,
        Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] base/drivers/arch_topology: Default dmips-mhz if
 they are not set in DT

On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 01:20:43PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> --- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> @@ -243,9 +243,20 @@ static int __init register_cpufreq_notifier(void)
>  	 * until we have the necessary code to parse the cpu capacity, so
>  	 * skip registering cpufreq notifier.
>  	 */
> -	if (!acpi_disabled || !raw_capacity)
> +	if (!acpi_disabled)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
> +	if (!raw_capacity) {
> +
> +		pr_info("cpu_capacity: No capacity defined in DT, set default "
> +		       "values to %ld\n", SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE);

Why the extra blank line?

And what is userspace going to do with this noise?  Is this an error?
Just normal operation?  A device should never be saying anything to the
log for normal boot functionality.  When is this called?

And no need for the "cpu_capacity:" right?  Shouldn't the pr_info() line
handle the prefix for you?

thanks,

greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ