linux-kernel - Re: [TEGRA194_CPUFREQ Patch 2/3] cpufreq: Add Tegra194 cpufreq driver

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200414054504.e3qn2cnxqur4sclw@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Tue, 14 Apr 2020 11:15:04 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Sumit Gupta <sumitg@...dia.com>
Cc:     rjw@...ysocki.net, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
        thierry.reding@...il.com, jonathanh@...dia.com, talho@...dia.com,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bbasu@...dia.com, mperttunen@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [TEGRA194_CPUFREQ Patch 2/3] cpufreq: Add Tegra194 cpufreq driver

On 13-04-20, 17:50, Sumit Gupta wrote:
> This was done considering long delay value as explained previously.
> Do you think that smp_call_function_single() would be better than work queue
> here?

Don't work with assumptions, you should test both and see which one
works better. Workqueue should never be faster than
smp_call_function_single() with my understanding.

-- 
viresh