linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] cpuidle : auto-promotion for cpuidle states

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:   Tue, 9 Apr 2019 15:06:47 +0530
From:   Abhishek <huntbag@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     rjw@...ysocki.net, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, mpe@...erman.id.au,
        ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] cpuidle : auto-promotion for cpuidle states

Hi Daniel,

On 04/08/2019 07:55 PM, Daniel Axtens wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry, just realised another thing I wanted to ask:
>
>> @@ -442,6 +442,26 @@ static int menu_select(struct cpuidle_driver *drv, struct cpuidle_device *dev,
>>   		}
>>   	}
>>
>>
>> +#ifdef CPUIDLE_FLAG_AUTO_PROMOTION
> Why is this based on CPUIDLE_FLAG_ rather than CONFIG_CPU_IDLE_? Won't
> this always be true, given that the flag is defined regardless of the
> config option in the header?
Yeah, You are right. This should have been CONFIG_CPU_IDLE_AUTO_PROMOTION.

--Abhishek