Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 07/11] x86/intel_pstate: the main boby of the intel_pstate driver

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 25.06.15 at 13:16, <wei.w.wang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> +int __init intel_pstate_init(void)
> +{
> +     int cpu, rc = 0;
> +     const struct x86_cpu_id *id;
> +     struct cpu_defaults *cpu_info;
> +
> +     id = x86_match_cpu(intel_pstate_cpu_ids);
> +     if (!id)
> +             return -ENODEV;
> +
> +     cpu_info = (struct cpu_defaults *)id->driver_data;
> +
> +     copy_pid_params(&cpu_info->pid_policy);
> +     copy_cpu_funcs(&cpu_info->funcs);
> +
> +     if (intel_pstate_msrs_not_valid())
> +             return -ENODEV;
> +
> +     all_cpu_data = xzalloc_array(struct cpudata *, NR_CPUS);
> +     if (!all_cpu_data)
> +             return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +     rc = cpufreq_register_driver(&intel_pstate_driver);
> +     if (rc)
> +             goto out;
> +
> +     return rc;
> +out:
> +     for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> +             if (all_cpu_data[cpu]) {
> +                     kill_timer(&all_cpu_data[cpu]->timer);
> +                     xfree(all_cpu_data[cpu]);
> +             }
> +     }

I have a hard time seeing where in this function the setup
happens that is being undone here (keeping in mind that the
notifier registration inside cpufreq_register_driver() doesn't
actually call the notifier function).

And then, looking at the diff between this and what Linux 4.2-rc3
has (which admittedly looks a little newer than what you sent, so
I already subtract some of the delta), it is significantly larger than
the source file itself. That surely doesn't suggest a clone-with-
minimal-delta. Yet as said before - either you do that, or you
accept us picking at things you inherited from Linux.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel