From: "Wang, Wei W" <wei.w.wang@intel.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "andrew.cooper3@citrix.com" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/11] x86/intel_pstate: support the use of intel_pstate in pmstat.c
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 15:16:25 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <286AC319A985734F985F78AFA26841F7A24FBE@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55F04C4902000078000A14BD@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
On 09/09/2015 21:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 09.09.15 at 14:56, <wei.w.wang@intel.com> wrote:
> Can you please explain more why it doesn't scale?
> From my point of view, any other future value representation can be
> passed from the producer to the related consumer through this method.
> Did you read all of my earlier replies? I already said there "Just consider what happens to the code when we end up gaining a few
> more drivers providing percentage values, and perhaps another one providing a third variant of output representation."
Yes, I have read that. I am not sure if I got your point, but my meaning was when we add new drivers to the code, e.g. xx_pstate driver, we can still have the name, "xx_pstate", assigned to "p_cpufreq->scaling_driver" to distinguish one another. If the driver uses a different variant of output representation, which cannot be held by " uint32_t scaling_max_perf" (it needs "uint64_t" for example, then that driver developer needs to add a new field here like " uint64_t scaling_max_perf_xx").
What is the scaling problem?
Best,
Wei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-09 15:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-25 11:17 [PATCH v4 10/11] x86/intel_pstate: support the use of intel_pstate in pmstat.c Wei Wang
2015-07-24 14:15 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-09 8:11 ` Wang, Wei W
2015-09-09 8:31 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-09 8:49 ` Wang, Wei W
2015-09-09 9:00 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-09 9:35 ` Wang, Wei W
2015-09-09 10:09 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-09 10:35 ` Wang, Wei W
2015-09-09 11:57 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-09 12:56 ` Wang, Wei W
2015-09-09 13:12 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-09 15:16 ` Wang, Wei W [this message]
2015-09-09 15:55 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-10 5:35 ` Wang, Wei W
2015-09-10 8:16 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-10 9:33 ` Wang, Wei W
2015-09-10 9:55 ` Jan Beulich
2015-09-10 10:10 ` Wang, Wei W
2015-09-10 10:20 ` Jan Beulich
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=286AC319A985734F985F78AFA26841F7A24FBE@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com \
--to=wei.w.wang@intel.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).