linux-kernel - Re: ...\n

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]

Date:   Tue, 31 May 2022 16:44:23 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Jack Allister <jalliste@...zon.com>
Cc:     bp@...en8.de, diapop@...zon.co.uk, hpa@...or.com,
        jmattson@...gle.com, joro@...tes.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, metikaya@...zon.co.uk,
        mingo@...hat.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, rkrcmar@...hat.com,
        sean.j.christopherson@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        vkuznets@...hat.com, wanpengli@...cent.com, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: ...\n

On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 02:02:36PM +0000, Jack Allister wrote:
> The reasoning behind this is that you may want to run a guest at a
> lower CPU frequency for the purposes of trying to match performance
> parity between a host of an older CPU type to a newer faster one.

That's quite ludicrus. Also, then it should be the host enforcing the
cpufreq, not the guest.