linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Fix initialization with disabled boost

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e4854492-86cc-4775-bbc3-5f16b73d008d@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:16:16 +0200
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
To: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@....com>,
 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 linux-pm <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
 Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, zhenglifeng1@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: Fix initialization with disabled boost

On 18/06/2025 16:57, Christian Loehle wrote:
> On 6/18/25 15:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 7:25 PM Christian Loehle
>> <christian.loehle@....com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The boost_enabled early return in policy_set_boost() caused
>>> the boost disabled at initialization to not actually set the
>>> initial policy->max, therefore effectively enabling boost while
>>> it should have been enabled.
>>
>> Did you mean "disabled"?
> 
> Yup, the latter 'enabled' should be disabled.
> 
>>
>> It would be good to mention the failure scenario here too.
>>
> 
> Absolutely, let me respin this in a series that provides some context, too.

I got confused as well. Is this for a dt file with some (higher) OPPs
marked with 'turbo-mode' or not?

[...]