Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 Sep 2022 16:35:39 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1] platform/x86/intel: pmc/core: Add Raptor Lake support to pmc core driver | From | "Kammela, Gayatri" <> |
| |
On 9/2/2022 1:55 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi, > > On 9/1/22 19:32, Kammela, Gayatri wrote: >> On 9/1/2022 8:47 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 9/1/22 17:43, Hans de Goede wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On 8/30/22 20:20, Gayatri Kammela wrote: >>>>> Add Raptor Lake client parts (both RPL and RPL_S) support to pmc core >>>>> driver. Raptor Lake client parts reuse all the Alder Lake PCH IPs. >>>>> >>>>> Cc: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com> >>>>> Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> >>>>> Cc: David Box <david.e.box@intel.com> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Gayatri Kammela <gayatri.kammela@linux.intel.com> >>>> Thank you for your patch, I've applied this patch to my review-hans >>>> branch: >>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/pdx86/platform-drivers-x86.git/log/?h=review-hans >>> In file included from drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c:29: >>> ./arch/x86/include/asm/cpu_device_id.h:161:46: error: ‘INTEL_FAM6_RAPTORLAKE_S’ undeclared here (not in a function); did you mean ‘INTEL_FAM6_RAPTORLAKE_P’? >>> 161 | X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, INTEL_FAM6_##model, data) >>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~ >>> ./arch/x86/include/asm/cpu_device_id.h:46:27: note: in definition of macro ‘X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_STEPPINGS_FEATURE’ >>> 46 | .model = _model, \ >>> | ^~~~~~ >>> ./arch/x86/include/asm/cpu_device_id.h:129:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE’ >>> 129 | X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(vendor, family, model, \ >>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> ./arch/x86/include/asm/cpu_device_id.h:161:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL’ >>> 161 | X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, INTEL_FAM6_##model, data) >>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c:1918:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL’ >>> 1918 | X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL(RAPTORLAKE_S, &adl_reg_map), >>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> make[5]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:249: drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.o] Error 1 >>> >>> And dropped again, please upstream this through the tree which also has the new >>> INTEL_FAM6_RAPTORLAKE* macros. >>> >>> Here is my Acked-by for merging this through another tree: >>> >>> Acked-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Hans >> Hi Hans! >> >> Thank you for your Acked-by! The cpuid patch has been merged in to v6.0-rc3. I am not sure why its complaining about INTEL_FAM6_RAPTORLAKE_S being undeclared. >> >> patch - ea902bcc1943f7539200ec464de3f54335588774 : "x86/cpu: Add new Raptor Lake CPU model number". >> >> I made sure its built without errors before sending it out. > Ah I see, but my tree (like most trees) is based on 6.0-rc1, > please submit this patch to the same tree as through which > ea902bcc1943f7539200ec464de3f54335588774 went upstream, > with my Acked-by added. > > Thanks, > > Hans
Hi Hans!
I did send v2 based on review-hans branch with dependency patch included. Sorry for the delay and thank you!
> > > >>> >>> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c | 2 ++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c >>>>> index a1fe1e0dcf4a..17ec5825d13d 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/pmc/core.c >>>>> @@ -1914,6 +1914,8 @@ static const struct x86_cpu_id intel_pmc_core_ids[] = { >>>>> X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL(ALDERLAKE_N, &tgl_reg_map), >>>>> X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL(ALDERLAKE, &adl_reg_map), >>>>> X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL(RAPTORLAKE_P, &tgl_reg_map), >>>>> + X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL(RAPTORLAKE, &adl_reg_map), >>>>> + X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL(RAPTORLAKE_S, &adl_reg_map), >>>>> {} >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> base-commit: b90cb1053190353cc30f0fef0ef1f378ccc063c5
| |