Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 23 Dec 2021 10:22:01 +0800 | From | Huang Rui <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v6 02/14] x86/msr: add AMD CPPC MSR definitions |
| |
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 02:05:40AM +0800, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 1:17 AM Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Boris, > > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 11:45:09PM +0800, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 12:35:16AM +0800, Huang Rui wrote: > > > > > > Capitalize subject's first letter: > > > [x86/msr: add AMD CPPC MSR definitions] > > > [x86/msr: Add AMD CPPC MSR definitions] > > > > Thank you for the reply! Updated. > > > > > > > > > AMD CPPC (Collaborative Processor Performance Control) function uses MSR > > > > registers to manage the performance hints. So add the MSR register macro > > > > here. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com> > > > > --- > > > > arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h > > > > index 01e2650b9585..e7945ef6a8df 100644 > > > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h > > > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h > > > > @@ -486,6 +486,23 @@ > > > > > > > > #define MSR_AMD64_VIRT_SPEC_CTRL 0xc001011f > > > > > > > > +/* AMD Collaborative Processor Performance Control MSRs */ > > > > +#define MSR_AMD_CPPC_CAP1 0xc00102b0 > > > > +#define MSR_AMD_CPPC_ENABLE 0xc00102b1 > > > > +#define MSR_AMD_CPPC_CAP2 0xc00102b2 > > > > +#define MSR_AMD_CPPC_REQ 0xc00102b3 > > > > +#define MSR_AMD_CPPC_STATUS 0xc00102b4 > > > > + > > > > +#define CAP1_LOWEST_PERF(x) (((x) >> 0) & 0xff) > > > > +#define CAP1_LOWNONLIN_PERF(x) (((x) >> 8) & 0xff) > > > > +#define CAP1_NOMINAL_PERF(x) (((x) >> 16) & 0xff) > > > > +#define CAP1_HIGHEST_PERF(x) (((x) >> 24) & 0xff) > > > > + > > > > +#define REQ_MAX_PERF(x) (((x) & 0xff) << 0) > > > > +#define REQ_MIN_PERF(x) (((x) & 0xff) << 8) > > > > +#define REQ_DES_PERF(x) (((x) & 0xff) << 16) > > > > +#define REQ_ENERGY_PERF_PREF(x) (((x) & 0xff) << 24) > > > > > > All those bitfield names are too generic - they should at least be > > > prefixed with "CPPC_" > > > > > > If an Intel CPPC set of MSRs appears too, then the prefix should be > > > "AMD_CPPC_" and so on. > > > > > > > The similar function in Intel names HWP (Hardware P-State), and related MSR > > registers names as "HWP_" as the prefixes like below: > > > > /* IA32_HWP_CAPABILITIES */ > > #define HWP_HIGHEST_PERF(x) (((x) >> 0) & 0xff) > > #define HWP_GUARANTEED_PERF(x) (((x) >> 8) & 0xff) > > #define HWP_MOSTEFFICIENT_PERF(x) (((x) >> 16) & 0xff) > > #define HWP_LOWEST_PERF(x) (((x) >> 24) & 0xff) > > > > Hi Rafael, > > > > Can we use the "CPPC_" as the prefixes for AMD CPPC MSR bitfield name? > > Well, what about using "AMD_CPPC_" instead of "REQ_" in these names? > The names of the analogous Intel macros start with "HWP_" which > basically stands for "INTEL_CPPC_".
Fine for me, updated it in V7.
Thanks, Ray
| |