linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI: CPPC: add sysfs entry for guaranteed performance

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, 21 Jun 2024 12:16:06 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Petr Tesarik <petr.tesarik@...e.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: CPPC: add sysfs entry for guaranteed performance

On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 10:49 AM Petr Tesarik <petr.tesarik@...e.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu,  6 Jun 2024 13:55:41 +0200
> Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.com> wrote:
>
> > Expose the CPPC guaranteed performance as reported by the platform through
> > GuaranteedPerformanceRegister.
> >
> > The current value is already read in cppc_get_perf_caps() and stored in
> > struct cppc_perf_caps (to be used by the intel_pstate driver), so only the
> > attribute itself needs to be defined.
>
> Are there any objections to exposing this CPPC register through sysfs?
> I mean, if everybody is OK with it, the patch could be acked and queued
> for 6.11, right?

It actually has been queued already, sorry for the missing notice.

It's been in linux-next for some time even.