linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] New thermal interface allowing IPA to get max power

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:   Wed, 27 Jan 2021 10:11:50 +0000
From:   Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        vireshk@...nel.org, rafael@...nel.org, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org,
        Dietmar.Eggemann@....com, amitk@...nel.org, rui.zhang@...el.com,
        cw00.choi@...sung.com, myungjoo.ham@...sung.com,
        kyungmin.park@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] New thermal interface allowing IPA to get max
 power



On 1/27/21 9:15 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 26-01-21, 10:39, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>> As it's a RFC, it still misses the cpufreq sysfs implementation, but would
>> be addressed if all agree.
> 
> Not commenting on the whole stuff but if you ever need something for cpufreq, it
> is already there. Look for these.
> 
> store_one(scaling_min_freq, min);
> store_one(scaling_max_freq, max);
> 
> Hopefully they will work just fine.
> 

So, can I assume you don't mind to plumb it into these two?

Yes, I know them and the tricky macro. I just wanted to avoid
one patch for this macro and one patch for cpufreq_cooling.c,
which would use it.

If you agree and Chanwoo agrees for the devfreq, and Daniel
for the new callback in cooling device, then I would continue
by adding missing patches for cpufreq-cooling part.

Regards,
Lukasz