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:   Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:39:33 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Yue Hu <zbestahu@...il.com>
Cc:     rjw@...ysocki.net, mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        huyue2@...ong.com, zbestahu@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: schedutil: Don't consider freq reduction to
 busy CPU if need_freq_update is set

On 19-02-21, 11:38, Yue Hu wrote:
> There's a possibility: we will use the previous freq to update if next_f
> is reduced for busy CPU if need_freq_update is set in
> sugov_update_next_freq().

Right.

> This possibility would happen now? And this
> update is what we want if it happens?

This is exactly what we want here, don't reduce speed for busy CPU, but we also
need to make sure we are in the policy's valid range which cpufreq core will
take care of.

> This is related to another possible patch ready to send.

I am not sure what's there to send now.

-- 
viresh

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ