[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 10/11] x86/intel_pstate: support the use of intel_pstate in pmstat.c
>>> On 16.06.15 at 09:09, <wei.w.wang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 15/06/2015 20:37, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >>> On 15.06.15 at 14:28, <wei.w.wang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On 15/06/2015 17:15, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >> >>> On 15.06.15 at 02:30, <wei.w.wang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > We actually want it be intel_pstate specific. If maintainers agree, >> >> > I think renaming it to intel_pstate_policy is a good option. >> >> >> >> No, this name is just ugly. If you need driver specific data, have a >> >> void >> > pointer >> >> in the generic structure; the driver can then allocate memory to be >> >> pointed to by that, and can store there whatever private data it needs. >> > >> > OK. I plan to make the following changes: >> > >> > 1) in cpufreq_policy, add a field - void *private_data; >> > >> > >> > 2) add a new structure: >> > struct intel_pstate_policy { >> > unsigned int policy; >> > } >> >> struct intel_pstate_private or struct intel_pstate_data please. >> > > "struct perf_limits" is currently used only by intel_pstate, should we also > move it to the intel_pstate_private struct, instead of the cpufreq_policy? Yes of course - anything private to the driver should go there. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |