[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y7gB+uVpSJAQ6p+9@zn.tnic>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2023 12:11:54 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: "Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org" <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"kan.liang@...ux.intel.com" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf/x86/rapl: Add support for Intel Meteor Lake
On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 11:56:18AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> It's a trade-off in any case: there's a point where quirk flags or even
> feature flags become harder to read and harder to maintain than cleanly
> separated per model driver functions.
Yeah, no, singular: a synthetic feature *flag*: X86_FEATURE_RAPL.
cpu/intel.c can set it and driver can test it.
Everything else inside the driver.
Until Intel can get their act together and actually do a CPUID bit like AMD. :-P
But when you think about it, whether the model matching happens in the driver or
in cpu/intel.c doesn't matter a whole lot.
All that matters is, they should finally give it a CPUID bit.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists