[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111208011356.GA24062@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 02:13:56 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
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 08:07:31PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > +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 ?
The code does
static int __init eps_init(void)
{
if (!x86_match_cpu(eps_cpu_id) || boot_cpu_data.x86_model < 10)
return -ENODEV;
So modprobe will load it, but if the CPU is too old it will just error out
again. I think that's reasonable. There's no direct way current
to express a >= in the matches because modprobe uses fnmatch()
Also most likely the old CPUs won't have the EST bit anyways, then
it won't even be loaded.
>
> > 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).
It's not done today, but I could add it.
But I tried to keep the existing behaviour. AFAIK distros just load them
all right? This matches this. I have no way to test these CPUs so I would
prefer to be as compatible as possible.
>
> > +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..
Ok.
Thanks for the review. I'll remove the comment.
-Andi
--
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