linux-kernel - Re: stable: commit "cpuidle: menu: Avoid discarding useful information" causes regressions

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: <CAJZ5v0h-=MU2uwC0+TZy0WpyyMpFibW58=t68+NPqE0W9WxWtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 15:47:06 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
Cc: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@....com>, 
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>, 
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@...ux.intel.com>, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, 
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: stable: commit "cpuidle: menu: Avoid discarding useful
 information" causes regressions

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 12:23 PM Sergey Senozhatsky
<senozhatsky@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> On (25/10/14 10:50), Christian Loehle wrote:
> > > Upstream fixup fa3fa55de0d ("cpuidle: governors: menu: Avoid using
> > > invalid recent intervals data") doesn't address the problems we are
> > > observing.  Revert seems to be bringing performance metrics back to
> > > pre-regression levels.
> >
> > Any details would be much appreciated.
> > How do the idle state usages differ with and without
> > "cpuidle: menu: Avoid discarding useful information"?
> > What do the idle states look like in your platform?
>
> Sure, I can run tests.

Would it be possible to check if the mainline has this issue?  That
is, compare the benchmark results on unmodified 6.17 (say) and on 6.17
with commit 85975daeaa4 reverted?