linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] cpuidle: psci: Add trace for PSCI domain idle

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: <20250129085102.1055165-1-keyz@google.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2025 16:51:02 +0800
From: Keita Morisaki <keyz@...gle.com>
To: christian.loehle@....com
Cc: aarontian@...gle.com, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, keyz@...gle.com, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lpieralisi@...nel.org, 
	mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, mhiramat@...nel.org, rafael@...nel.org, 
	rostedt@...dmis.org, sudeep.holla@....com, yimingtseng@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpuidle: psci: Add trace for PSCI domain idle

> > Yes, psci_domain_idle_(enter|exit) are not meant to replace cpu_idle nor a
> > variant of it. It's new and different events that provide finer=grained info.

> I mentioned it because it means it doesn't benefit from cpu_idle tooling
> directly, which is slightly odd, but fine with me.

I might not fully understand your comments.
Do you mean that even mentioning cpu_idle in the commit message does not feel
right to you, or utilizing cpu_idle by exposing the determined state instead of
adding new trace events is the right direction?