linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 0/5] cpufreq: Use QoS layer to manage freq-constraints

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190408104638.43ttxvxhwbp6ba2u@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Mon, 8 Apr 2019 16:16:38 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:     Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, mka@...omium.org,
        juri.lelli@...il.com, Qais.Yousef@....com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/5] cpufreq: Use QoS layer to manage freq-constraints

On 21-02-19, 12:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, February 21, 2019 12:29:26 PM CET Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > This patchset attempts to manage CPU frequency constraints using the PM
> > QoS framework. It only does the basic stuff right now and moves the
> > userspace constraints to use the QoS infrastructure.
> > 
> > Todo:
> > - Migrate all users to the QoS framework and get rid of cpufreq specific
> >   notifiers.
> > - Make PM QoS learn about the relation of CPUs in a policy, so a single
> >   list of constraints is managed for all of them instead of per-cpu
> >   constraints.
> > 
> > V1->V2:
> > - The previous version introduced a completely new framework, this one
> >   moves to PM QoS instead.
> > - Lots of changes because of this.
> 
> Well, thanks for working on this, but I'm rather unlikely to look at it in
> detail before 5.1-rc1 is released.

Ping!

-- 
viresh