linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] Introduce Intel RAPL power capping driver

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <1380924862.2081.118.camel@joe-AO722>
Date:	Fri, 04 Oct 2013 15:14:22 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, len.brown@...el.com, rjw@...k.pl,
	arjan@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] Introduce Intel RAPL power capping driver

On Fri, 2013-10-04 at 13:12 -0700, Jacob Pan wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Oct 2013 11:07:45 -0700
> Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 2013-10-04 at 09:36 -0700, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> > > The Intel Running Average Power Limit(RAPL) technology provides
> > > platform software with the ability to monitor, control, and get
> > > notifications on power usage.
> > []
> > > diff --git a/drivers/powercap/Makefile b/drivers/powercap/Makefile
> > []
> > > +/* bitmasks for RAPL MSRs, used by primitive access functions */
> > > +#define ENERGY_STATUS_MASK      0xffffffff
> > > +
> > > +#define POWER_LIMIT1_MASK       0x7FFF
> > > +#define POWER_LIMIT1_ENABLE     BIT(15)
> > > +#define POWER_LIMIT1_CLAMP      BIT(16)
> > > +
> > > +#define POWER_LIMIT2_MASK       (0x7FFFULL<<32)
> > > +#define POWER_LIMIT2_ENABLE     BIT_ULL(47)
> > > +#define POWER_LIMIT2_CLAMP      BIT_ULL(48)
> > > +#define POWER_PACKAGE_LOCK      BIT_ULL(63)
> > > +#define POWER_PP_LOCK           BIT(31)
> > > +
> > > +#define TIME_WINDOW1_MASK       (0x7F<<17)
> > > +#define TIME_WINDOW2_MASK       (0x7FULL<<49)
> > 
> > 
> > Is there a reason why these masks aren't all ULL?
> > 
> > 
> 
> are you referring to this line below not being ULL?
> > > +#define TIME_WINDOW1_MASK       (0x7F<<17)
> if this is the case, I did that because it is not more than 32 bit.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jacob

Isn't LIMIT1/WINDOW1 used as ull anyway?
It doesn't hurt to show that the value is also ull.

--
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/