linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq/intel_pstate: Do not issue the not supported message on !Intel

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: <20190401083902.GC28264@zn.tnic>
Date:   Mon, 1 Apr 2019 10:39:02 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Erwan Velu <e.velu@...teo.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq/intel_pstate: Do not issue the not supported
 message on !Intel

On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 08:11:51AM +0000, Erwan Velu wrote:
> I'd suggest something like this and keep the 'CPUID not supported' part 
> untouched.
> 
>      if (no_load) || (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_INTEL)

Yeah, that's the usual thing we do in such cases and the better idea,
I'll do that in v2.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.