linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] interconnect: qcom: rpm: Set QoS parameters regardless of RPM bw setting

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <fbc145b0-0aa7-fde6-5736-5b175880e48f@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2023 01:10:58 +0000
From:   Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, andersson@...nel.org,
        agross@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org
Cc:     marijn.suijten@...ainline.org, Georgi Djakov <djakov@...nel.org>,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <kholk11@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] interconnect: qcom: rpm: Set QoS parameters
 regardless of RPM bw setting

On 04/01/2023 00:39, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> tldr: new soc good (*), old soc bad-or-no-effect (*), should ask QC

I think this needs to be tested before application. If it is benign on < 
kernel 5.4 SoCs then that's fine too but, it does need to be validated 
as so.

I suspect there's no silicon dependency, it is probably "just how the 
code was written" without any silicon dependency backing it up but, I 
think we need to do the work to prove that before applying.

An RFT with some interconnect settings targeted for test on pre 5.4 and 
post 5.4 SoCs would do.

---
bod