linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 05/10] ACPI: cpufreq: Switch to QoS requests instead of cpufreq notifier

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, 6 Aug 2019 10:01:05 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
        Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
        Erik Schmauss <erik.schmauss@...el.com>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:ACPI COMPONENT ARCHITECTURE (ACPICA)" <devel@...ica.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 05/10] ACPI: cpufreq: Switch to QoS requests instead of
 cpufreq notifier

On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 6:39 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On 05-08-19, 11:42, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 23, 2019 8:14:05 AM CEST Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > @@ -310,8 +339,11 @@ static int __init acpi_processor_driver_init(void)
> > >     cpuhp_setup_state_nocalls(CPUHP_ACPI_CPUDRV_DEAD, "acpi/cpu-drv:dead",
> > >                               NULL, acpi_soft_cpu_dead);
> > >
> > > -   acpi_thermal_cpufreq_init();
> > > -   acpi_processor_ppc_init();
> > > +   if (!cpufreq_register_notifier(&acpi_processor_notifier_block,
> > > +                                  CPUFREQ_POLICY_NOTIFIER)) {
> > > +           acpi_processor_cpufreq_init = true;
> >
> > Can't that be set/cleared by acpi_processor_notifier() itself?
>
> This is required to be done only once at initialization and setting it
> to true again and again on every invocation of the notifier callback
> doesn't look right.
>
> I have updated the patch based on rest of your suggestions, please see
> if it looks okay now.

Yes, it does, thanks!

[No need to resend, I'll take it from this message.]