[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130118195806.GA3252@pd.tnic>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:58:06 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc: "Gopalakrishnan, Aravind" <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@....com>,
"rjw@...k.pl" <rjw@...k.pl>, Andre Przywara <andre@...rep.de>,
"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andreas <linuxuser330250@....net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/cpufreq: Warn user when powernow-k8 tries to
fall back to acpi-cpufreq and it is unavailable.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 07:38:34PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 08:36:56PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> > Ok, how much can we rely on ACPI to have this ACPI_ADR_SPACE_SYSTEM_IO
> > properly set on K8? Because the thing is, we want to use acpi-cpufreq on
> > F10h onwards and leave powernow-k8 to K8s.
>
> SYSTEM_IO only supports single processors and was superceded in ACPI
> 2.0. Are there any single-core F10h?
Hmm, maybe some downcored creations, who knows? But actually, that
doesn't matter: we want to exit early from acpi-cpufreq loading on K8
only so the check should simply be:
if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD &&
boot_cpu_data.x86 == 0xf) {
pr_debug(...)
...
}
Yeah, I think that should work. I'll add your patch to the others and
make a patchset to give it a run. If it looks good, we'll queue it for
3.9 so that it can see more testing.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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