linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] OPP: refactor dev_pm_opp_of_register

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:   Mon, 6 Apr 2020 15:05:41 +0100
From:   Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To:     Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-imx@....com
Cc:     Morten.Rasmussen@....com, Dietmar.Eggemann@....com,
        javi.merino@....com, cw00.choi@...sung.com,
        b.zolnierkie@...sung.com, rjw@...ysocki.net, sudeep.holla@....com,
        viresh.kumar@...aro.org, nm@...com, sboyd@...nel.org,
        rui.zhang@...el.com, amit.kucheria@...durent.com, mingo@...hat.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        qperret@...gle.com, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
        shawnguo@...nel.org, s.hauer@...gutronix.de, festevam@...il.com,
        kernel@...gutronix.de, khilman@...nel.org, agross@...nel.org,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, robh@...nel.org,
        matthias.bgg@...il.com, steven.price@....com,
        tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com, alyssa.rosenzweig@...labora.com,
        airlied@...ux.ie, daniel@...ll.ch, liviu.dudau@....com,
        lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, patrick.bellasi@...bug.net,
        orjan.eide@....com, rdunlap@...radead.org, mka@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] OPP: refactor dev_pm_opp_of_register_em() and
 update related drivers

Hi Daniel,

Thank you for your comments.

On 4/3/20 5:21 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 18/03/2020 12:45, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>> The Energy Model framework supports both: CPUs and devfreq devices. Drop
>> the CPU specific interface with cpumask and add struct device. Add also a
>> return value. This new interface provides easy way to create a simple
>> Energy Model, which then might be used in i.e. thermal subsystem.
> 
> This patch contains too many different changes.

OK, I will create 4 patches:
1) change with new argument in API function:
    void dev_pm_opp_of_register_em(dev, cpumask)
   and updated drivers
2) changes with _get_cpu_power --> _get_power
3) changes adding int return in dev_pm_opp_of_register_em()
    and updating error handling path inside
4) header changes with new dev_pm_opp_of_unregister_em()

> 
> There are fixes and traces added in addition to a function prototype change. >
> Please provide patches separated by logical changes.

I will try to make this API change in a safe way, which
won't break cpufreq drivers compilation.

> 
> If the cpumask is extracted in the underlying function
> em_register_perf_domain() as suggested in the previous patch 1/5,
> dev_pm_opp_of_register_em() can be struct device centric only.

That would be ideal situation but unfortunately not possible to
implement (as responded in 1/5).

Regards,
Lukasz