linux-kernel - Re: [RFC-next 0/1] Odroid C2: Enable DVFS for cpu

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: <7hfthtrvvv.fsf@baylibre.com>
Date:   Mon, 09 Dec 2019 14:12:36 -0800
From:   Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>
To:     Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>,
        Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>
Cc:     devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC-next 0/1] Odroid C2: Enable DVFS for cpu

Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com> writes:

> Some how this patch got lost, so resend this again.
>
> [0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11136545/
>
> This patch enable DVFS on GXBB Odroid C2.
>
> DVFS has been tested by running the arm64 cpuburn
> [1] https://github.com/ssvb/cpuburn-arm/blob/master/cpuburn-a53.S
> PM-QA testing
> [2] https://git.linaro.org/power/pm-qa.git [cpufreq testcase]
>
> Tested on latest U-Boot 2019.07-1 (Aug 01 2019 - 23:58:01 +0000) Arch Linux ARM

Have you tested with the Harkernel u-boot?

Last I remember, enabling CPUfreq will cause system hangs with the
Hardkernel u-boot because of improperly enabled frequencies, so I'm not
terribly inclined to merge this patch.

> Patch based on my next-20191031 for 5.5.x kernel.
> Hope this is not late entry.

Re: "too late".  FYI... when you post things as RFC, it means you're
looking for comments (Request For Comment) but that it's not intended
for merging.

I didn't see any comments on this, but I also didn't see a non-RFC
follow-up, so I didn't queue it for v5.5.

Kevin