linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 0/5] arm_scmi: vendors: Qualcomm Generic Vendor Extensions

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: <132d1404-9009-9fb5-1fb9-63eca03ce9fc@quicinc.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2024 17:19:25 +0530
From: Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
CC: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>, <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        <andersson@...nel.org>, <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <quic_rgottimu@...cinc.com>, <quic_kshivnan@...cinc.com>,
        <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 0/5] arm_scmi: vendors: Qualcomm Generic Vendor
 Extensions



On 12/5/24 21:22, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 04:26:55PM +0530, Sibi Sankar wrote:
>> On 11/22/24 14:07, Johan Hovold wrote:
> 
>>> I have a Lenovo ThinkPad T14s set up now so I gave this series a spin
>>> there too, and there I do *not* see the above mentioned -EOPNOSUPP error
>>> and the memlat driver probes successfully.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, this series seems to have no effect on a kernel
>>> compilation benchmark. Is that expected?
>>
>> I can have a look at your tree. But memlat in general
>> depends on the cpu frequency when your benchmarks max
>> the cpu's the ddr/llcc are scaled accordingly by it.
> 
> A kernel compilation should max out the CPU frequency on all cores.
> 
>>> And does this mean that you should stick with the uppercase "MEMLAT"
>>> string after all? The firmware on my CRD is not the latest one, but I am
>>> using the latest available firmware for the T14s.
>>
>> We should stick with "memlat" if we run into a device in the
>> wild that doesn't support "MEMLAT"
> 
> Ok. So the updated firmware supports both strings?


Sry for the delay, was out sick. Yes the updated firmware supports both
strings.

-Sibi

> 
> Johan