From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tim Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] platform: x86: Support Turbo Boost Max 3.0 for non HWP systems Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:43:42 -0800 Message-ID: <1484855022.2833.36.camel@linux.intel.com> References: <1484764155-183890-1-git-send-email-srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> <1484779250.2833.34.camel@linux.intel.com> <1484822314.2133.222.camel@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1484822314.2133.222.camel@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Shevchenko , Srinivas Pandruvada , dvhart@infradead.org Cc: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: platform-driver-x86.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2017-01-19 at 12:38 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 14:40 -0800, Tim Chen wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 10:29 -0800, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote: > > > > > >   > > > + > > > +static int itmt_legacy_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu) > > > +{ > > > + static u32 max_highest_perf = 0, min_highest_perf = > > > U32_MAX; > > Should the max_highest_perf and min_highest_perf be defined and > > initialized > > outside this function?  Otherwise the max and min value will be lost > > and reset > > each time a new cpu comes online. > > > > We will always find max_highest_perf == min_highest_perf. > Perhaps you missed static keyword there. Their behaviour is the same as > for global variables, i.e. the initial value assigned only at the > beginning. > Yes I did miss the static modifier. Sorry for the noise. Tim