Re: [PATCH v7 13/13] xen/cpufreq: Adapt SET/GET_CPUFREQ_CPPC xen_sysctl_pm_op for amd-cppc driver

[Anthony PERARD <anthony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 06:52:18PM +0800, Penny Zheng wrote:
> diff --git a/tools/misc/xenpm.c b/tools/misc/xenpm.c
> index 02981c4583..eedb745a46 100644
> --- a/tools/misc/xenpm.c
> +++ b/tools/misc/xenpm.c
> @@ -38,6 +38,13 @@
>  static xc_interface *xc_handle;
>  static unsigned int max_cpu_nr;
>  
> +static const char cpufreq_policy_str[][12] = {

Is it necessary to hard-code an hand calculated size of the literal
strings? Can't we let the compiler do that for us? With this as type:

    static const char *cpufreq_policy_str[] = {

The compiler might not detect an issue if we write "11" instead of "12",
for example.

> +    [CPUFREQ_POLICY_UNKNOWN] = "unknown",
> +    [CPUFREQ_POLICY_POWERSAVE] = "powersave",
> +    [CPUFREQ_POLICY_PERFORMANCE] = "performance",
> +    [CPUFREQ_POLICY_ONDEMAND] = "ondemand",
> +};
> +
>  /* help message */
>  void show_help(void)
>  {

Otherwise the tool side of the patch looks fine to me,
so: Acked-by: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks,

-- 
Anthony PERARD