From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: my dothan didn't work with cpufreq... Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 10:34:25 -0700 Sender: cpufreq-bounces@www.linux.org.uk Message-ID: <1090517665.5267.9.camel@ixodes.goop.org> References: <40F2FA8B.10307@lifl.fr> <20040713094937.GB8124@dominikbrodowski.de> <1090461320.13505.3.camel@localhost> <20040722060437.GA8888@dominikbrodowski.de> <1090479407.4351.6.camel@localhost> <20040722093126.GA8418@dominikbrodowski.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20040722093126.GA8418@dominikbrodowski.de> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=gmane.org@www.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Dominik Brodowski Cc: cpufreq list On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 11:31 +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > > The hacky way to work it out would be to read > > back the MSR and see what freq/voltage pair you have (which would only > > work at max speed). > ... but as many systems boot at a lower speed on battery power, I wouldn't > want to do this. Oh, no, I wasn't even considering suggesting it. It's too nasty. > However, as "enhanced SpeedStep" is going to be introduced on > desktop CPUs, the problem will increase: the MSR will likely have a > different encoding. See Venkatesh's patches for details. Also, I fear that > as more CPUs support enhanced SpeedStep, the larger > speedstep-centrino.{o,ko} will become. The tables are not very big, and I was thinking about generating the model names from a template rather than explicitly enumerating them all as we do now. But you're right, it looks like the simple table approach will be hard or impossible to maintain. > > +static const struct cpu_id cpu_ids[] = { > > + [CPU_BANIAS] = { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, 9, 5 }, > > + [CPU_DOTHAN_A1] = { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, 13, 1 }, > > + [CPU_DOTHAN_B0] = { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, 13, 6 }, > > Hm, I'm unsure whether this is proper CodingStyle... IIRC, much effort was > spent in converting such { }s to include the respective "fields", like > { .x86_vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, x86_family = 6 ... > and so on. For a tiny little structure like this, which is defined immediately above, this is fine. (CodingStyle makes no mention of structure initialization.) J