From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.skyhub.de (mail.skyhub.de [5.9.137.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B69B2F56 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:10:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ea9733e77f329c23fffea6a903.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ea:9733:e77f:329c:23ff:fea6:a903]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id 71DEB1EC04CB; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 15:10:51 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1663765851; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=ozPGXkhQCcXW67WvAixWgantH6wjYoJ8SSScScLN3uU=; b=nnLOflJ9Jx3vMjKoksPafVEanEjnJJxfxqTctRswLDb92r8jDPojepDJ7VUSEwZvg0npTy Okm1+u9NG4eD7ypRILXypbMiQorbG9Y78qT5ykfLIpo0dWbYV/04byeaa1TodzozaA+lss 0Hc9lGo0eA+lzGV03I/a+2HY2B6LQsk= Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2022 15:10:51 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: K Prateek Nayak Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rafael@kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de, andi@lisas.de, puwen@hygon.cn, mario.limonciello@amd.com, peterz@infradead.org, rui.zhang@intel.com, gpiccoli@igalia.com, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, ananth.narayan@amd.com, gautham.shenoy@amd.com, Calvin Ong , stable@vger.kernel.org, regressions@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: processor_idle: Skip dummy wait for processors based on the Zen microarchitecture Message-ID: References: <20220921063638.2489-1-kprateek.nayak@amd.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: regressions@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 04:09:16PM +0530, K Prateek Nayak wrote: > I was not aware of cpu_feature_enabled() and it makes perfect sense to > use it here. It is no difference what the callers use - we simply want to unify the interfaces and not have boot_cpu* and cpu_feature_* and so on. One is enough and we want to use cpu_feature_enabled() everywhere possible. Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette