[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111208010730.GB27892@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 20:07:31 -0500
From: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kay.sievers@...y.org, trenn@...e.de,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] cpufreq: Add support for x86 cpuinfo auto loading
On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 04:41:20PM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
I think this bit isn't right..
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/e_powersaver.c b/drivers/cpufreq/e_powersaver.c
> index 4bd6815..4604951 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/e_powersaver.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/e_powersaver.c
> +static struct x86_cpu_id eps_cpu_id[] = {
> + { X86_VENDOR_CENTAUR, 6, X86_MODEL_ANY, X86_FEATURE_EST },
> + {}
> +};
...
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(x86cpu, eps_cpu_id);
> +
> static int __init eps_init(void)
> {
> - struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(0);
> -
> - /* This driver will work only on Centaur C7 processors with
> - * Enhanced SpeedStep/PowerSaver registers */
> - if (c->x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_CENTAUR
> - || c->x86 != 6 || c->x86_model < 10)
> - return -ENODEV;
This makes e_powersaver bind to every family 6 VIA cpu.
But the old logic only bound to certain models.
Won't this will clash with this other driver if both are built ?
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/longhaul.c b/drivers/cpufreq/longhaul.c
> index f47d26e..b4263ce 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/longhaul.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/longhaul.c
>
> +static struct x86_cpu_id longhaul_id[] = {
> + { X86_VENDOR_CENTAUR, 6 },
> + {}
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(x86cpu, longhaul_id);
iirc, the intention here was longhaul on cpus that don't have EST,
and e_powersaver on those that do. Maybe an additional check for the
absense of EST in longhaul's init code would do the trick.
(sidenote: I don't recall why we even have e-powersaver, instead of them
just using acpi-cpufreq).
> +static struct x86_cpu_id powernow_k8_ids[] = {
> + { X86_VENDOR_AMD, 0xf, },
> + /* RED-PEN If HW PSTATE was a normal feature bit it could be matched here
> + * instead of a (limited) model list.
> + */
You mean make fake one in the identify code ? Do-able I guess.
Though that would just be moving this list from this driver to a different place,
and as this is the only place that cares..
Other stuff looks ok on a quick eyeball. I wouldn't be surprised though if
this series throws some surprises, especially on some of the older hardware.
Seems like a step in the right direction though.
Dave
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists