[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [XEN PATCH v2 2/2] x86/cpufreq: separate powernow/hwp/acpi cpufreq code
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Sergiy Kibrik <sergiy_kibrik@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 12:17:49 +0300
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=epam.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=epam.com; dkim=pass header.d=epam.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=Mh0lkTIZ/mO9Anjsb9m8JxNXWSKDyIWTzOzzar42uFE=; b=mG7j5wK6/mEyk9fw5Kfuf0asJfEaulqlVjPh/VNMg4LMwFzzNzC8JQ32p3oiAFwHAHK0JPI+jlz6ww6+W+RrNxrMUGl8Osfe9v1rAyMG/Gp9N7lZ6KrH63nrd65XDKGh7WuapOlx0aTJT+cY0Sx6gsyGmu97cDEXSYiA1o8DZIYLXfweCuygw064IiQvrgme2LCOdSsvbH5Sq1fEGUMb3Sa/Ha5rL2hCh+8Skq2MFtDgE0eqxS5UWe9+ZPTW3VIzTPl84BLnur3wz35UcMtziXd40Wg6DgdzDjkuOiN6+Evt2oD8SDW33/XA6lXx+4B76dscj4tldcJg0rfReGdjww==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Yz43EGyG3yMMh7DInEgY5cMe/pV48HC+taNtbRclx6o9JpOlmVVLy8jKT2PNZl8yqu5sZsP/srEXfWnjcNHW/QkDA0ZOc8MJQNxsf6PLyBkZqtYrh5XyXr2yFI3DnIhTd/VlJbRnZx9yN3fSs9Sc2w3fxzYhEnVGpPx5PhhEcnfP9uwRD9gD25xYlmcYiz7yIqv0xRw/UOIQ5GoNBCcWWMylmn76McvBo04wsIyrAWPIzGlblBUZPnSCSwnU99lgApcYFZFTZcdSkrk8L6tUxtA7EZb7aiEd7tIkt0bIc6FB01aHCHcFzXn4oFGaOi0Q2xojfmuKnSsr3JSYkfRScw==
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Tue, 09 Jul 2024 09:18:13 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
03.07.24 18:14, Jan Beulich:
On 01.07.2024 14:19, Sergiy Kibrik wrote:
--- a/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c
@@ -255,7 +255,7 @@ static int get_cpufreq_para(struct xen_sysctl_pm_op *op)
strlcpy(op->u.get_para.scaling_driver, "Unknown", CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN);
if ( !strncmp(op->u.get_para.scaling_driver, XEN_HWP_DRIVER_NAME,
- CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN) )
+ CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEL) )
Wrapping like this is confusing, not just because of the flawed indentation.
Please can this be
if ( !strncmp(op->u.get_para.scaling_driver, XEN_HWP_DRIVER_NAME,
CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN) &&
IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEL) )
? Perhaps the IS_ENABLED() would also better be first (not just here).
sure, will fix that
--- a/xen/drivers/cpufreq/utility.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/cpufreq/utility.c
@@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ int cpufreq_driver_getavg(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int
flag)
if (!cpu_online(cpu) || !(policy = per_cpu(cpufreq_cpu_policy, cpu)))
return 0;
- freq_avg = get_measured_perf(cpu, flag);
+ freq_avg = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEL) ? get_measured_perf(cpu, flag) : 0;
if ( freq_avg > 0 )
return freq_avg;
Why is this? APERF/MPERF aren't Intel-only MSRs.
yes, it seems to be a mistake..
-Sergiy
|
