[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SJ1PR11MB6083BB886A09D6850ABAFE7DFC312@SJ1PR11MB6083.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 19:55:47 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "tglx@...utronix.de"
<tglx@...utronix.de>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"kan.liang@...ux.intel.com" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>, "mingo@...nel.org"
<mingo@...nel.org>, "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com" <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/5] x86/cpu: Replace PEBS use of 'x86_cpu_desc' use with
'x86_cpu_id'
> The 'x86_cpu_desc' and 'x86_cpu_id' structures are very similar.
> Reduce duplicate infrastructure by moving the few users of
> 'x86_cpu_id' to the much more common variant.
This paragraph is backwards. You are moving 'x86_cpu_desc to 'x86_cpu_id.
-Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists