[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f97a0b69-3117-3f59-257e-3aa837f54444@hygon.cn>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 21:32:41 +0800
From: Pu Wen <puwen@...on.cn>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
x86@...nel.org, thomas.lendacky@....com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/16] x86/pmu: enable Hygon support to PMU
infrastructure
On 2018/9/4 18:48, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 08:43:54PM +0800, Pu Wen wrote:
>> Hygon PMU arch is similar to AMD Family 17h. To support Hygon PMU, the
>> initialization flow for it just call amd_pmu_init() and change PMU name
>
> That sentence reads funny.
Will rewrite this sentence to make it more understandable. :)
> In general, you seem to be explaining *what* your patches do and not
> *why*. This is the wrong. Always explain the *why* - the *what* is
> visible from the diff.
>
> You probably need to brush up on
> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst, section 2.
All right, will relearn the document and rework the patch descriptions.
>> + case 0x18:
>> + if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_HYGON) {
>> + pr_cont("Fam18h ");
>
> Didn't we agree that you'll verify whether family 0x18 is going to be
> Hygon only?
>
> What happened to that checking?
...
> Same here.
>
> What's up?
Will remove all the remaining unneeded Hygon vendor checking through
the whole patch set to minimize the code modification.
Thanks,
Pu Wen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists