linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: gcc-x1e80100: Enable runtime PM

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <abaa9d52-6e82-4beb-b7be-fab0496338ae@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 10:56:58 +0100
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Val Packett <val@...kett.cool>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: gcc-x1e80100: Enable runtime PM

On 10/13/25 1:06 AM, Val Packett wrote:
> Enable the main clock controller driver to participate in runtime
> power management.

The commit message does not explain whether there's any observable
benefits to this change

> Signed-off-by: Val Packett <val@...kett.cool>
> ---
> Seems like this would be one of the prerequisites for actually reaching
> deeper power states.. I've been running with this patch on a Dell
> Latitude 7455 for quite a while, did not see any harm for sure.

"seems like" is vague.. is there any change in behavior that suggests
this really makes a difference?

Konrad