linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq statistics retrieved by drivers

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: <ae352c39-f7c4-c69e-0113-7c810c130ee0@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 Aug 2020 10:19:23 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
Cc:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, cristian.marussi@....com,
        rjw@...ysocki.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq statistics retrieved by drivers



On 7/31/2020 8:56 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 10:36:51AM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>>
>> In this case I think we would have to create debugfs.
>> Sudeep do you think these debugfs should be exposed from the protocol
>> layer:
>> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c
> 
> I prefer above over cpufreq as we can support for all the devices not
> just cpus which avoids adding similar support elsewhere(mostly devfreq)
> 
>> or maybe from the cpufreq scmi driver? I would probably be safer to have
>> it in the cpufreq driver because we have scmi_handle there.
>>
> 
> Cristian was thinking if we can consolidate all such debugfs under one
> device may be and that should eliminate your handle restriction. I would
> like to see how that works out in implementation but I don't have any 
> better suggestion ATM.

debugfs is not enabled in production kernels, and especially not with
Android kernels, so sticking those in sysfs like the existing cpufreq
subsystem statistics may be a better choice.
-- 
Florian