[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87eetmpy56.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:30:29 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"maintainer\:X86 ARCHITECTURE \(32-BIT AND 64-BIT\)" <x86@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Mark Gross <mgross@...ux.intel.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...durent.com>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
ALSA Development Mailing List <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-crypto <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 09/22] cpufreq: Convert to new X86 CPU match macros
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:18 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
>> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 6, 9, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL),
>> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 6, 13, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL),
>> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 15, 3, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL),
>> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 15, 4, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL),
>
>> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0x8, 0),
>> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0xb, 0),
>> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 15, 0x2, 0),
>
>> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0x8, 0),
>> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0xb, 0),
>> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 15, 0x2, 0),
>
> Perhaps use names instead of 6 and 15?
Thought about that and did not come up with anyting useful. FAM6 vs. 6
is not really any better
> Also, NULL vs. 0?
Both works, but yes I used mostly NULL.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists