Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 10/14] x86: generic aperf/mperf code.
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>,
       Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@amd.com>,
       Balbir Singh <balbir@in.ibm.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
       Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>,
       Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
       Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>,
       cpufreq@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <200909041119.06979.trenn@suse.de>
References: <20090903132145.482814810@chello.nl>
	 <20090903132213.006719409@chello.nl>  <200909041119.06979.trenn@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 11:25:11 +0200
Message-Id: <1252056311.7564.3.camel@twins>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 904
Lines: 25

On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 11:19 +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> You still use struct perf_pair split/hi/lo members in #ifdef __i386__ 
> case which you deleted above.

> >               shift_count = fls(h);
> >  
> > -             cur.aperf.whole >>= shift_count;
> > -             cur.mperf.whole >>= shift_count;
> > +             cur.aperf >>= shift_count;
> > +             cur.mperf >>= shift_count;
> >       }
> >  
> >       if (((unsigned long)(-1) / 100) < cur.aperf.split.lo) {
> Same here, possibly still elsewhere.
> Is this only x86_64 compile tested?

Of course, who still has 32bit only hardware anyway ;-)

Will fix, thanks for spotting that.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/