[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87360fq3sc.fsf@stealth>
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2020 08:25:07 +0900
From: Punit Agrawal <punitagrawal@...il.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Wei Huang <wei.huang2@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Add processor to the ignore PSD override list
Hi Rafael,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 11:45 PM Punit Agrawal <punitagrawal@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Rafael,
>>
>> Punit Agrawal <punitagrawal@...il.com> writes:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > While looking into Giovanni's patches to enable frequency invariance
>> > on AMD systems[0], I noticed an issue with initialising frequency
>> > domain information on a recent AMD APU.
>> >
>> > Patch 1 refactors the test to ignore firmware provided frequency
>> > domain into a separate function.
>> >
>> > Patch 2 adds said APU (Family: 0x17, Model: 0x60, Stepping: 0x01) to
>> > the list of CPUs for which the PSD override is ignored. I am not quite
>> > happy with having to special case a particular CPU but also couldn't
>> > find any documentation to help identify the CPUs that don't need the
>> > override.
>>
>> Are you be OK to pick the first two patches if there are no issues?
>
> Please send them as non-RFC and change the name of override_acpi_psd()
> to indicate that it is AMD-specific.
Ack - I will incorporate your comments in the next version (once the
ongoing discussion finishes).
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists