linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] cpufreq: Always enforce policy limits even without frequency table

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: <20250908071920.f6ppfr7shy2cb2wg@vireshk-i7>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 12:49:20 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Zihuan Zhang <zhangzihuan@...inos.cn>
Cc: "Rafael J . wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
	zhenglifeng <zhenglifeng1@...wei.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] cpufreq: Always enforce policy limits even
 without frequency table

On 08-09-25, 15:08, Zihuan Zhang wrote:
> One idea we are considering is to check whether driver->verify points to
> cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify and use that as a heuristic to
> enforce the presence of target_index():
> 
>  ((driver_data->verify == cpufreq_generic_frequency_table_verify) !=
> !!driver_data->target_index)
> 
> I haven’t tested this approach yet, so I’m not sure if it will be fully
> reliable.

I don't this is a good idea. It isn't necessary for any driver to use
the generic functions.

-- 
viresh