linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] PM: EM: Refactor struct em_perf_domain and add default

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:   Mon, 21 Aug 2023 16:22:31 +0100
From:   Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To:     Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc:     rui.zhang@...el.com, amit.kucheria@...durent.com,
        amit.kachhap@...il.com, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org,
        viresh.kumar@...aro.org, len.brown@...el.com, pavel@....cz,
        Pierre.Gondois@....com, ionela.voinescu@....com,
        mhiramat@...nel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, rafael@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] PM: EM: Refactor struct em_perf_domain and add
 default_table

Hi Dietmar,

On 8/16/23 14:04, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 21/07/2023 17:50, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>> The Energy Model is going to support runtime modifications. Refactor old
>> implementation which accessed struct em_perf_state and introduce
>> em_perf_domain::default_table to clean up the design. This new field
>> will help to better distinguish 2 performance state tables.
>>
>> Update all drivers or frameworks which used the old field:
>> em_perf_domain::table and now should use em_perf_domain::default_table.
>>
> 
> This doesn't compile:
> 
>    SYNC    include/config/auto.conf.cmd
>    UPD     include/config/kernel.release
>    UPD     include/generated/utsrelease.h
>    CC      arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.s
> In file included from ./include/linux/device.h:16,
>                   from ./include/linux/acpi.h:14,
>                   from ./include/acpi/apei.h:9,
>                   from ./include/acpi/ghes.h:5,
>                   from ./include/linux/arm_sdei.h:8,
>                   from arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c:10:
> ./include/linux/energy_model.h: In function ‘em_cpu_energy’:
> ./include/linux/energy_model.h:256:10: error: ‘struct em_perf_domain’ has no member named ‘table’
>    256 |  ps = &pd->table[pd->nr_perf_states - 1];
>        |          ^~
> ./include/linux/energy_model.h:266:34: error: ‘struct em_perf_domain’ has no member named ‘table’
>    266 |  i = em_pd_get_efficient_state(pd->table, pd->nr_perf_states, freq,
>        |                                  ^~
> ./include/linux/energy_model.h:268:10: error: ‘struct em_perf_domain’ has no member named ‘table’
>    268 |  ps = &pd->table[i];
>        |          ^~
> make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:116: arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.s] Error 1
> make[1]: *** [/opt/git/kernel_org/Makefile:1275: prepare0] Error 2
> make: *** [Makefile:234: __sub-make] Error 2
> 
> In v2 this patch was much later in the set.
> 
> 
> 

Yes, you are right. It didn't trigger somehow in my build testing
probably due to my ccache or missed step and built+test the whole set.
My apologies for that, I'll double check that next time.

Regards,
Lukasz