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: <eccb89bf-80cc-e96a-925e-181095305631@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 26 Aug 2019 14:12:56 +0200
From:   Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Douglas RAILLARD <douglas.raillard@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        viresh.kumar@...aro.org, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/cpufreq: Align trace event behavior of fast
 switching

On 26/08/2019 13:24, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 11:51:17AM +0200, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> 
>> Not sure about the extra  'if trace_cpu_frequency_enabled()' but I guess
>> it doesn't hurt.
> 
> Without that you do that for_each_cpu() iteration unconditionally, even
> if the tracepoint is disabled.

Makes sense, I'm wondering if we want this in
cpufreq_notify_transition() CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE for the
non-fast-switching drivers as well.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ