[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250227175129.v23sm56tkxcnlqvz@desk>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 09:51:29 -0800
From: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
daniel.sneddon@...ux.intel.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>,
"Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@...il.com>,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>,
Perry Yuan <Perry.Yuan@....com>,
Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/9] Utilize cpu-type for CPU matching
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 01:40:55PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > Signed-off-by: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > Pawan Gupta (9):
> > x86/cpu: Prepend 0x to the hex values in cpu_debug_show()
> > cpufreq: intel_pstate: Avoid SMP calls to get cpu-type
> > perf/x86/intel: Use cache cpu-type for hybrid PMU selection
> > x86/cpu: Remove get_this_hybrid_cpu_*()
> > x86/cpu: Name CPU matching macro more generically (and shorten)
> > x86/cpu: Add cpu_type to struct x86_cpu_id
> > x86/cpu: Update x86_match_cpu() to also use cpu-type
> > x86/bugs: Declutter vulnerable CPU list
> > x86/rfds: Exclude P-only parts from the RFDS affected list
>
> So it looks like this series, despite being complete, fell between the
> cracks during the usual end-of-year distractions.
>
> To get the ball rolling I have applied the first 4 patches to
> tip:x86/cpu - the cpufreq one needed a small conflict resolution, and I
> have adjusted the debug output of the first one to not break
> pre-existing vertical tabulation.
Thanks for picking this up.
> Mind double checking the result in tip:x86/cpu and submit the remaining
> 5 patches on top of it?
I had quick look, fixes and merge resolution LGTM. I will submit the
remaining 5 patches soonish.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists