From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@suse.cz>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: fix platform info detection in frequency invariance
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 09:44:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7dffbd70-d7db-6d58-abbb-19006cd9e4a2@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220520161022.5972-2-ggherdovich@suse.cz>
On 5/20/22 09:10, Giovanni Gherdovich wrote:
> if (slv_set_max_freq_ratio(&base_freq, &turbo_freq))
> goto out;
>
> - if (x86_match_cpu(has_glm_turbo_ratio_limits) &&
> - skx_set_max_freq_ratio(&base_freq, &turbo_freq, 1))
> + if (x86_match_cpu(has_glm_turbo_ratio_limits)) {
> + skx_set_max_freq_ratio(&base_freq, &turbo_freq, 1);
> goto out;
> + }
>
> - if (x86_match_cpu(has_knl_turbo_ratio_limits) &&
> - knl_set_max_freq_ratio(&base_freq, &turbo_freq, 1))
> + if (x86_match_cpu(has_knl_turbo_ratio_limits)) {
> + knl_set_max_freq_ratio(&base_freq, &turbo_freq, 1);
> goto out;
> + }
>
> - if (x86_match_cpu(has_skx_turbo_ratio_limits) &&
> - skx_set_max_freq_ratio(&base_freq, &turbo_freq, 4))
> + if (x86_match_cpu(has_skx_turbo_ratio_limits)) {
> + skx_set_max_freq_ratio(&base_freq, &turbo_freq, 4);
> goto out;
> + }
>
> if (core_set_max_freq_ratio(&base_freq, &turbo_freq))
> goto out;
But didn't the last patch in the series carefully change the return
value for knl_set_max_freq_ratio()? Now, the only call site is ignoring
the return value? That seems odd.
Also, this is a mess. These constructs:
static const struct x86_cpu_id has_knl_turbo_ratio_limits[] = {
X86_MATCH(XEON_PHI_KNL),
X86_MATCH(XEON_PHI_KNM),
{}
};
static const struct x86_cpu_id has_skx_turbo_ratio_limits[] = {
X86_MATCH(SKYLAKE_X),
{}
};
static const struct x86_cpu_id has_glm_turbo_ratio_limits[] = {
X86_MATCH(ATOM_GOLDMONT),
X86_MATCH(ATOM_GOLDMONT_D),
X86_MATCH(ATOM_GOLDMONT_PLUS),
{}
};
are rather goofy. A single array like rapl_ids[] that points to the
handler function would do us a lot more good here, say:
static const struct x86_cpu_id has_knl_turbo_ratio_limits[] = {
X86_MATCH(XEON_PHI_KNL, &knl_set_max_freq_ratio),
X86_MATCH(XEON_PHI_KNM, &knl_set_max_freq_ratio),
X86_MATCH(SKYLAKE_X, &skx_set_max_freq_ratio),
X86_MATCH(ATOM_GOLDMONT, &skx_set_max_freq_ratio),
X86_MATCH(ATOM_GOLDMONT_D, &skx_set_max_freq_ratio),
X86_MATCH(ATOM_GOLDMONT_PLUS, &skx_set_max_freq_ratio),
X86_MATCH(ANY, &core_set_max_freq_ratio),
{}
};
That would get rid of all the goofy gotos and actually puts all the
logic in one place. BTW, I'm not 100% sure about the 'ANY' line. I
think that's how those work, but please double-check me on it.
While it's generally best to keep bug fixes to a minimum, I think this
one is worth a bit of a cleanup because it will remove a bunch of spaghetti.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-20 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-20 16:10 [PATCH 1/2] x86: Fix return value in frequency invariance setup for XEON_PHI_KNL/KNM Giovanni Gherdovich
2022-05-20 16:10 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: fix platform info detection in frequency invariance Giovanni Gherdovich
2022-05-20 16:44 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2022-05-23 9:56 ` Giovanni Gherdovich
2022-05-21 10:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: Fix return value in frequency invariance setup for XEON_PHI_KNL/KNM Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-23 9:57 ` Giovanni Gherdovich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7dffbd70-d7db-6d58-abbb-19006cd9e4a2@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ggherdovich@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome