linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] clk: sunxi-ng: Consider alternative parent rates when determining NKM clock rate

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: <pk3som3qkrs66hk3hf6zczmd5hqsrb5u2pkmolngqinjm7b753@27vlqdbxemwa>
Date:   Mon, 12 Jun 2023 10:53:05 +0200
From:   Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>
To:     Frank Oltmanns <frank@...manns.dev>
Cc:     Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Roman Beranek <me@...y.cz>,
        Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] clk: sunxi-ng: Consider alternative parent rates
 when determining NKM clock rate

On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 11:29:05AM +0200, Frank Oltmanns wrote:
> On 2023-06-07 at 14:27:46 +0200, Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech> wrote:
> > [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> > On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 09:35:20AM +0200, Frank Oltmanns wrote:
> >> So, my question: Is spending the 30 ms fine or do I need to optimize for
> >> speed in order for this patchset to be accepted? Or is 2 ms also too
> >> much of an increase, in which case I'm out of ideas. :-)
> >
> > You keep mentioning it, but it's really not clear to me why you think
> > that both are intertwined, or depend on one another?
> 
> I'm sorry about that. I guess, I got carried away. And furthermore I
> took your mentioning of all bets being of how often setting rates
> happens when HDMI comes into play as encouragement to optimize for
> speed, which it clearly wasn't.
> 
> I saw the increase in time as a regression, because it might break
> boards that I don't have access to. But since you say it's fine, I'll
> speak no more of it.

I'm not really saying it's fine, I guess I'm saying it's fine until
proven otherwise :)

Maxime