On Sunday, December 22, 2013 02:22:48 PM Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, December 11, 2013 02:39:27 PM Jacob Pan wrote:
>
> > > @@ -941,6 +949,7 @@ static void package_power_limit_irq_restore(int
> > > package_id)
> > > static const struct x86_cpu_id rapl_ids[] = {
> > > { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, 0x2a},/* SNB */
> > > { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, 0x2d},/* SNB EP */
> > > + { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, 0x37},/* VLV */
> > > { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, 0x3a},/* IVB */
> > > { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, 0x45},/* HSW */
> > > /* TODO: Add more CPU IDs after testing */
>
> This isn't a problem introduced in this patch, but it made me notice it...
>
> Would it really hurt anyone to spell out the architectures here, rather
> than using obscure 3-letter abbreviations? It's bad enough trying to
> map the hex model numbers to the decimal ones in /proc/cpuinfo without
> also having to remember what a VLV is.
I guess you can prepare a patch for that?
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
