linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 04/10] cpufreq: powerpc_cbe: 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]

Message-ID: <20190819022614.oy5qdozde2afibwu@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Mon, 19 Aug 2019 07:56:14 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 04/10] cpufreq: powerpc_cbe: Switch to QoS requests
 instead of cpufreq notifier

On 09-08-19, 11:01, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 4:34 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 23-07-19, 11:44, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > The cpufreq core now takes the min/max frequency constraints via QoS
> > > requests and the CPUFREQ_ADJUST notifier shall get removed later on.
> > >
> > > Switch over to using the QoS request for maximum frequency constraint
> > > for ppc_cbe_cpufreq driver.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/cpufreq/ppc_cbe_cpufreq.c     | 19 +++++-
> > >  drivers/cpufreq/ppc_cbe_cpufreq.h     |  8 +++
> > >  drivers/cpufreq/ppc_cbe_cpufreq_pmi.c | 96 +++++++++++++++++----------
> > >  3 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
> >
> > -------------------------8<-------------------------
> 
> If you do it this way, Patchwork will not pick up the patch.
> 
> Please send afresh with "[Update]" or bumped up version number in the
> subject (or both).

Okay, will take care of this in future. Was away on holidays and so
the late reply. Thanks.

-- 
viresh