[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140813075834.GY9918@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:58:34 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org, eranian@...gle.com,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf, x86: Remove incorrect model number from
Haswell perf
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 06:45:13PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
> index 2502d0d..ef6c8b7 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
> @@ -2541,7 +2541,6 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void)
>
> case 60: /* Haswell Client */
> case 70:
> - case 71:
> case 63:
> case 69:
> x86_pmu.late_ack = true;
Can you properly describe the remaining model numbers? Surely there's a
significant difference between these chips otherwise why give them
difference model numbers.
Looking at the wikipedia page for Haswell I suspect its things like:
Haswell-{DT,MB,H,ULT}. If so can you but the right name with the right
number?
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists