[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1484822314.2133.222.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 12:38:34 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
dvhart@...radead.org
Cc: platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] platform: x86: Support Turbo Boost Max 3.0 for non
HWP systems
On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 14:40 -0800, Tim Chen wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 10:29 -0800, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> >
> > +
> > +static int itmt_legacy_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu)
> > +{
> > + static u32 max_highest_perf = 0, min_highest_perf =
> > U32_MAX;
>
> Should the max_highest_perf and min_highest_perf be defined and
> initialized
> outside this function? Otherwise the max and min value will be lost
> and reset
> each time a new cpu comes online.
>
> We will always find max_highest_perf == min_highest_perf.
Perhaps you missed static keyword there. Their behaviour is the same as
for global variables, i.e. the initial value assigned only at the
beginning.
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists