| Message ID | 20210123100608.2349629-2-yeyunfeng@huawei.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 65348ba259e27ad4b69459ef477facd4c702bbf6 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | None | expand |
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 11:07 AM Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@huawei.com> wrote: > > It's not a good way to access the phys_proc_id of cpuinfo directly. > So using topology_physical_package_id(cpu) instead. > > Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@huawei.com> Srinivas, Rui, any concerns? > --- > drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c > index 5f3d39b8212a..8888adcb3927 100644 > --- a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c > +++ b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c > @@ -547,7 +547,7 @@ static void rapl_init_domains(struct rapl_package *rp) > > if (i == RAPL_DOMAIN_PLATFORM && rp->id > 0) { > snprintf(rd->name, RAPL_DOMAIN_NAME_LENGTH, "psys-%d", > - cpu_data(rp->lead_cpu).phys_proc_id); > + topology_physical_package_id(rp->lead_cpu)); > } else > snprintf(rd->name, RAPL_DOMAIN_NAME_LENGTH, "%s", > rapl_domain_names[i]); > -- > 2.27.0 >
On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 13:46 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 11:07 AM Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@huawei.com> > wrote: > > It's not a good way to access the phys_proc_id of cpuinfo directly. > > So using topology_physical_package_id(cpu) instead. > > > > Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@huawei.com> > > Srinivas, Rui, any concerns? Looks good. Thanks, Srinivas > > > --- > > drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c > > b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c > > index 5f3d39b8212a..8888adcb3927 100644 > > --- a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c > > +++ b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c > > @@ -547,7 +547,7 @@ static void rapl_init_domains(struct > > rapl_package *rp) > > > > if (i == RAPL_DOMAIN_PLATFORM && rp->id > 0) { > > snprintf(rd->name, RAPL_DOMAIN_NAME_LENGTH, > > "psys-%d", > > - cpu_data(rp- > > >lead_cpu).phys_proc_id); > > + topology_physical_package_id(rp- > > >lead_cpu)); > > } else > > snprintf(rd->name, RAPL_DOMAIN_NAME_LENGTH, > > "%s", > > rapl_domain_names[i]); > > -- > > 2.27.0 > >
diff --git a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c index 5f3d39b8212a..8888adcb3927 100644 --- a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c +++ b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c @@ -547,7 +547,7 @@ static void rapl_init_domains(struct rapl_package *rp) if (i == RAPL_DOMAIN_PLATFORM && rp->id > 0) { snprintf(rd->name, RAPL_DOMAIN_NAME_LENGTH, "psys-%d", - cpu_data(rp->lead_cpu).phys_proc_id); + topology_physical_package_id(rp->lead_cpu)); } else snprintf(rd->name, RAPL_DOMAIN_NAME_LENGTH, "%s", rapl_domain_names[i]);
It's not a good way to access the phys_proc_id of cpuinfo directly. So using topology_physical_package_id(cpu) instead. Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@huawei.com> --- drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)