From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965264AbaH0VEP (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:04:15 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:39546 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965197AbaH0VEF (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:04:05 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,862,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="377839690" From: Andi Kleen To: peterz@infradead.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, eranian@google.com, tglx@linutronix.de, Andi Kleen Subject: [PATCH 1/5] perf, x86: Remove incorrect model number from Haswell perf Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 14:03:53 -0700 Message-Id: <1409173437-3041-2-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.9.3 In-Reply-To: <1409173437-3041-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> References: <1409173437-3041-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Andi Kleen 71 is a Broadwell, not a Haswell. The model number was added by mistake earlier. Remove it for now, until it can be re-added later with real Broadwell support. In practice it does not cause a lot of issues because the Broadwell PMU is very similar to Haswell, but some details were wrong, and it's better to handle it correctly. Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen --- arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c index 89bc750..f962e26 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c @@ -2544,7 +2544,6 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void) case 63: case 69: case 70: - case 71: x86_pmu.late_ack = true; memcpy(hw_cache_event_ids, snb_hw_cache_event_ids, sizeof(hw_cache_event_ids)); memcpy(hw_cache_extra_regs, snb_hw_cache_extra_regs, sizeof(hw_cache_extra_regs)); -- 1.9.3