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: <20200805160312.GC4818@bogus>
Date:   Wed, 5 Aug 2020 17:03:12 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:     Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, cristian.marussi@....com,
        rjw@...ysocki.net, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq statistics retrieved by drivers

On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 06:34:36PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 05-08-20, 12:04, Lukasz Luba wrote:
> > I know that Viresh is going to develop patches and improve these
> > cpufreq stats framework. Maybe he also had this 'aggregation' in mind.
> > I will leave it him.
>
> I am only going to look at cpufreq's view of stats independently from
> the firmware.
>

+1, I agree with that. Kernel must avoid any logic to aggregate or
interpret the data in a generic way. The userspace tools can manage that
especially if this tend to be platform specific.

--
Regards,
Sudeep