linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] cpufreq: Allow arch_freq_get_on

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: <Z5K4aDaZIbhRCbOP@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 22:45:12 +0100
From: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@....com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, ionela.voinescu@....com,
	sudeep.holla@....com, will@...nel.org, catalin.marinas@....com,
	rafael@...nel.org, sumitg@...dia.com, yang@...amperecomputing.com,
	vanshikonda@...amperecomputing.com, lihuisong@...wei.com,
	zhanjie9@...ilicon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] cpufreq: Allow arch_freq_get_on_cpu to return an
 error

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:42:50AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 21-01-25, 16:14, Beata Michalska wrote:
> > Theoretically speaking - it should, though what would 0 actually
> > represent then ?
> 
> 0 won't be a failure, that's clear, since errors are represented
> differently now. I am not sure what 0 frequency would mean and it can
> be left as an architecture specific value, which is a corner case I am
> not sure will ever occur.
That would mean we are opting for presenting '0' value (whatever that means)
instead of trying alternative ways of getting 'current' frequency ?
This is still the scaling_cur_freq.

---
BR
Beata
> 
> -- 
> viresh