From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UPPERCASE_50_75 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5D2DC4332B for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 20:30:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9291B20739 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 20:30:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726902AbgCTUa4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 16:30:56 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:37098 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726789AbgCTUa4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 16:30:56 -0400 Received: from p5de0bf0b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.224.191.11] helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jFOHm-0003TQ-I5; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:30:30 +0100 Received: by nanos.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E29761039FC; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:30:29 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: LKML , "maintainer\:X86 ARCHITECTURE \(32-BIT AND 64-BIT\)" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Mark Gross , Tony Luck , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Linux PM , Srinivas Pandruvada , Len Brown , Paolo Bonzini , Darren Hart , Andy Shevchenko , ACPI Devel Maling List , linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, Platform Driver , Jean Delvare , Guenter Roeck , linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, Zhang Rui , Daniel Lezcano , Amit Kucheria , Chanwoo Choi , Jacob Pan , Adrian Hunter , Ulf Hansson , linux-mmc , Bjorn Helgaas , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Takashi Iwai , ALSA Development Mailing List , Herbert Xu , "David S. Miller" , linux-crypto Subject: Re: [patch 09/22] cpufreq: Convert to new X86 CPU match macros In-Reply-To: References: <20200320131345.635023594@linutronix.de> <20200320131509.564059710@linutronix.de> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:30:29 +0100 Message-ID: <87eetmpy56.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-hwmon-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org Andy Shevchenko writes: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:18 PM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 6, 9, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 6, 13, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 15, 3, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 15, 4, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0x8, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0xb, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 15, 0x2, 0), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0x8, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0xb, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 15, 0x2, 0), > > Perhaps use names instead of 6 and 15? Thought about that and did not come up with anyting useful. FAM6 vs. 6 is not really any better > Also, NULL vs. 0? Both works, but yes I used mostly NULL. Thanks, tglx From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [patch 09/22] cpufreq: Convert to new X86 CPU match macros Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:30:29 +0100 Message-ID: <87eetmpy56.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> References: <20200320131345.635023594@linutronix.de> <20200320131509.564059710@linutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: LKML , "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Mark Gross , Tony Luck , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Linux PM , Srinivas Pandruvada , Len Brown , Paolo Bonzini , Darren Hart , Andy Shevchenko , ACPI Devel Maling List , linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, Platform Driver , Jean Delvare , Guenter Roeck li List-Id: platform-driver-x86.vger.kernel.org Andy Shevchenko writes: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:18 PM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 6, 9, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 6, 13, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 15, 3, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 15, 4, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0x8, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0xb, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 15, 0x2, 0), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0x8, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0xb, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 15, 0x2, 0), > > Perhaps use names instead of 6 and 15? Thought about that and did not come up with anyting useful. FAM6 vs. 6 is not really any better > Also, NULL vs. 0? Both works, but yes I used mostly NULL. Thanks, tglx From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, UPPERCASE_50_75,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E06A9C4332B for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 13:55:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alsa0.perex.cz (alsa0.perex.cz [77.48.224.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A5FD2072D for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 13:55:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alsa-project.org header.i=@alsa-project.org header.b="fzDoJe51" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6A5FD2072D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FBC515F9; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 14:54:40 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz 8FBC515F9 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1584971730; bh=nxgga+nH6b51TGWsS58+xEcIBZHWwWZyBEfNJeJyKJk=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Cc:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=fzDoJe51PEA05Rc8Go/E71CFg9DeLlLkMSrXUwdtHT1vFW9TPmykVMzzrZeW5O6yi an8Fxs0HnpkixFulf97y84mLeGy11qtQ1WyoHnF7BBh2UtHl1GmOml0mq5d9LqR+56 1umXlFbajDaHUklw9r4omf2IYXIQ0/bPyxgB1yKo= Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4B91F802EB; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 14:47:52 +0100 (CET) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id CADCFF8015B; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:30:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from Galois.linutronix.de (galois.linutronix.de [IPv6:2a0a:51c0:0:12e:550::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C80F5F80126 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:30:36 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz C80F5F80126 Received: from p5de0bf0b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.224.191.11] helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jFOHm-0003TQ-I5; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:30:30 +0100 Received: by nanos.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E29761039FC; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:30:29 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [patch 09/22] cpufreq: Convert to new X86 CPU match macros In-Reply-To: References: <20200320131345.635023594@linutronix.de> <20200320131509.564059710@linutronix.de> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 21:30:29 +0100 Message-ID: <87eetmpy56.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1, SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 14:47:38 +0100 Cc: Ulf Hansson , "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE \(32-BIT AND 64-BIT\)" , Viresh Kumar , ALSA Development Mailing List , Platform Driver , Jacob Pan , Srinivas Pandruvada , Amit Kucheria , Mark Gross , Herbert Xu , Chanwoo Choi , Daniel Lezcano , ACPI Devel Maling List , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Darren Hart , Zhang Rui , Guenter Roeck , Len Brown , Jean Delvare , Linux PM , linux-mmc , Bjorn Helgaas , Takashi Iwai , Adrian Hunter , linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, Tony Luck , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , LKML , linux-crypto , Paolo Bonzini , "David S. Miller" , Andy Shevchenko X-BeenThere: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" Andy Shevchenko writes: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:18 PM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 6, 9, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 6, 13, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 15, 3, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 15, 4, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0x8, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0xb, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 15, 0x2, 0), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0x8, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0xb, 0), >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 15, 0x2, 0), > > Perhaps use names instead of 6 and 15? Thought about that and did not come up with anyting useful. FAM6 vs. 6 is not really any better > Also, NULL vs. 0? Both works, but yes I used mostly NULL. Thanks, tglx