Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/19] cpupower: add amd-pstate sysfs entries into
 libcpufreq
To:     Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Deepak Sharma <deepak.sharma@amd.com>,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
        Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>,
        Nathan Fontenot <nathan.fontenot@amd.com>,
        Jinzhou Su <Jinzhou.Su@amd.com>,
        Xiaojian Du <Xiaojian.Du@amd.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
References: <20210908150001.3702552-1-ray.huang@amd.com>
 <20210908150001.3702552-16-ray.huang@amd.com>
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <870445a1-1148-e5d1-08f8-df630466d788@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Thu, 9 Sep 2021 16:26:06 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210908150001.3702552-16-ray.huang@amd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 9/8/21 8:59 AM, Huang Rui wrote:
> These amd-pstate sysfs entries will be used on cpupower for amd-pstate
> kernel module.
> 

This commit log doesn't make sense. If these sysfs entries are used
for amd-pstate kernel module, why are they defined here.

Describe how these are used and the relationship between these defines
and the amd-pstate kernel module

> Signed-off-by: Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com>
> ---
>   tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpufreq.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
>   1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpufreq.c b/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpufreq.c
> index c3b56db8b921..3f92ddadaad2 100644
> --- a/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/tools/power/cpupower/lib/cpufreq.c
> @@ -69,6 +69,14 @@ enum cpufreq_value {
>   	SCALING_MIN_FREQ,
>   	SCALING_MAX_FREQ,
>   	STATS_NUM_TRANSITIONS,
> +	AMD_PSTATE_HIGHEST_PERF,
> +	AMD_PSTATE_NOMINAL_PERF,
> +	AMD_PSTATE_LOWEST_NONLINEAR_PERF,
> +	AMD_PSTATE_LOWEST_PERF,
> +	AMD_PSTATE_MAX_FREQ,
> +	AMD_PSTATE_NOMINAL_FREQ,
> +	AMD_PSTATE_LOWEST_NONLINEAR_FREQ,
> +	AMD_PSTATE_MIN_FREQ,
>   	MAX_CPUFREQ_VALUE_READ_FILES
>   };
>   

These are AMD specific values being added to a common code.

> @@ -80,7 +88,15 @@ static const char *cpufreq_value_files[MAX_CPUFREQ_VALUE_READ_FILES] = {
>   	[SCALING_CUR_FREQ] = "scaling_cur_freq",
>   	[SCALING_MIN_FREQ] = "scaling_min_freq",
>   	[SCALING_MAX_FREQ] = "scaling_max_freq",
> -	[STATS_NUM_TRANSITIONS] = "stats/total_trans"
> +	[STATS_NUM_TRANSITIONS] = "stats/total_trans",
> +	[AMD_PSTATE_HIGHEST_PERF] = "amd_pstate_highest_perf",
> +	[AMD_PSTATE_NOMINAL_PERF] = "amd_pstate_nominal_perf",
> +	[AMD_PSTATE_LOWEST_NONLINEAR_PERF] = "amd_pstate_lowest_nonlinear_perf",
> +	[AMD_PSTATE_LOWEST_PERF] = "amd_pstate_lowest_perf",
> +	[AMD_PSTATE_MAX_FREQ] = "amd_pstate_max_freq",
> +	[AMD_PSTATE_NOMINAL_FREQ] = "amd_pstate_nominal_freq",
> +	[AMD_PSTATE_LOWEST_NONLINEAR_FREQ] = "amd_pstate_lowest_nonlinear_freq",
> +	[AMD_PSTATE_MIN_FREQ] = "amd_pstate_min_freq"
>   };
>   
>   
> 

These are AMD specific values being added to a common code.
It doesn't sound right. What happens if there is a conflict
between AMD values and another vendor values?

This doesn't seem a good place to add these.

thanks,
-- Shuah