[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v3 05/14 RESEND] xenpm: Change get-cpufreq-para output for internal
- To: Jason Andryuk <jandryuk@xxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 16:35:12 +0200
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=dB4/rhLL5Ist8rEa+N+ZqWBPQdVApQyPPYPHHJTga2M=; b=XzkBiQYeoHkueUkEo3kTIZAdf/Ggh0K/TZmbKid/IJMYy6SNzmXxmFCg3LgQyWgT9mB21H8icy5Pz9UxMNbd7V/slYu+RC3viwCPHbVsSzgdUZ5Pf79MPS8amWWfOOHFYPGSB20nd6Fdo2pHF1OoTEoxWlVesfBXPBPMQDBGR/vvmb7/uNGhN4atTgJvZ15kpxe8nuq1hk7bIYvfRwBnRR6zZzCA8c+MfdLum5up3f+U9UUktw7fQ0MI9QuRNlQBCBaN6JTjjhOMyWaNFdfH44Ymrb14opUn5LCGPPt581GXnBsHEdAhcuPuH8VEsbVebEoPZxeUXoMu2jku+Gd4Dw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=RjPoXI9peTov5mIL79eiUWZc1JUtY2i2QVBYqiuu90q9TPd+nZAdUYwikXJOSU+pFGAtKqQFPC5Rr3MtuLkANtp0QoNvS7CY4wDvHgLkIWn6xvO6MFs/09Ptniz3dq7KA1DEKmelsfCPO2Bl0ovmyeUQ7gzlaQ/o02PrYQz9vK7DxTLk7/gExbkqEZZ18R29SqftqG2oEzQGdl/5ENeA4AsUsKriMXdD8IJrozB8GZXIuyIWcU8cQ9i2a2eclj8h7ttcVdBCvFgOO5gNoXu222IQ9j7AJEpxMrWQfJnV1Y+EMuBMSaDhDOpj1Am/la2UZcEQzjZ+qGgIyrf9EZv5mg==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Thu, 04 May 2023 14:35:49 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 01.05.2023 21:30, Jason Andryuk wrote:
> When using HWP, some of the returned data is not applicable. In that
> case, we should just omit it to avoid confusing the user. So switch to
> printing the base and turbo frequencies since those are relevant to HWP.
> Similarly, stop printing the CPU frequencies since those do not apply.
It vaguely feels like I have asked this before: Can you point me at a
place in the SDM where it is said that CPUID 0x16's "Maximum Frequency"
is the turbo frequency? Without such a reference I feel a little uneasy
with ...
> @@ -720,10 +721,15 @@ static void print_cpufreq_para(int cpuid, struct
> xc_get_cpufreq_para *p_cpufreq)
> printf(" %d", p_cpufreq->affected_cpus[i]);
> printf("\n");
>
> - printf("cpuinfo frequency : max [%u] min [%u] cur [%u]\n",
> - p_cpufreq->cpuinfo_max_freq,
> - p_cpufreq->cpuinfo_min_freq,
> - p_cpufreq->cpuinfo_cur_freq);
> + if ( internal )
> + printf("cpuinfo frequency : base [%u] turbo [%u]\n",
> + p_cpufreq->cpuinfo_min_freq,
> + p_cpufreq->cpuinfo_max_freq);
... calling it "turbo" (and not "max") here.
Jan
> + else
> + printf("cpuinfo frequency : max [%u] min [%u] cur [%u]\n",
> + p_cpufreq->cpuinfo_max_freq,
> + p_cpufreq->cpuinfo_min_freq,
> + p_cpufreq->cpuinfo_cur_freq);
>
> printf("scaling_driver : %s\n", p_cpufreq->scaling_driver);
>
|