linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 3/5] PM / QoS: Add support for MIN/MAX frequency 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20190613000441.GM137143@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 12 Jun 2019 17:04:41 -0700
From:   Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:     Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Qais.Yousef@....com, juri.lelli@...il.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/5] PM / QoS: Add support for MIN/MAX frequency
 constraints

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 04:21:34PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> This patch introduces the min-frequency and max-frequency device
> constraints, which will be used by the cpufreq core to begin with.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>

Again, I'm mostly ignorant about QoS, in the context of the
existing code (particularly looking at DEV_PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY)
this looks reasonable to me. FWIW:

Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>