From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH] Minor updates to powernow-k8 Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 17:53:17 -0400 Message-ID: <20070514215317.GE29024@redhat.com> References: <4648D2E1.5030802@amd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4648D2E1.5030802@amd.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: cpufreq-bounces@lists.linux.org.uk Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=m.gmane.org+glkc-cpufreq=m.gmane.org@lists.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Mark Langsdorf Cc: cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 04:21:37PM -0500, Mark Langsdorf wrote: > I've submitted the following patches before, but they don't > seem to have made it into the tree yet. I merged something into cpufreq.git yesterday, though not your patch, as I couldn't find it anywhere :-/ I only bumped as far as 0x70000 though which is what the user reported was necessary to make it work on his system. > Update the processor ID check to support newer RevF Turions > and indicate number of processors and cores more cleanly > in startup messages. I'm puzzled by AMDs naming/numbering scheme. How does RevF have a higher value than RevG ? Also, maybe we should rename CPUID_XMOD_REV_G to CPUID_XMOD_REV_MASK or similar if it's going to continually bump and change revs ? Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk