All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com
To: lenb@kernel.org
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>
Subject: [patch 1/2] acpi x86: Cleanup acpi_cpufreq structures related to aperf/mperf
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 11:26:07 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090406182723.927683000@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20090406182606.706570000@intel.com

[-- Attachment #1: 0001-acpi-x86-Cleanup-acpi_cpufreq-structures-related-to.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3383 bytes --]

Change structure name to make the code cleaner and simpler. No
functionality change in this patch.

Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c |   42 +++++++++++++--------------
 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
index 19f6b9d..340bdbe 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
@@ -241,23 +241,23 @@ static u32 get_cur_val(const struct cpumask *mask)
 	return cmd.val;
 }
 
-struct perf_cur {
+struct perf_pair {
 	union {
 		struct {
 			u32 lo;
 			u32 hi;
 		} split;
 		u64 whole;
-	} aperf_cur, mperf_cur;
+	} aperf, mperf;
 };
 
 
 static long read_measured_perf_ctrs(void *_cur)
 {
-	struct perf_cur *cur = _cur;
+	struct perf_pair *cur = _cur;
 
-	rdmsr(MSR_IA32_APERF, cur->aperf_cur.split.lo, cur->aperf_cur.split.hi);
-	rdmsr(MSR_IA32_MPERF, cur->mperf_cur.split.lo, cur->mperf_cur.split.hi);
+	rdmsr(MSR_IA32_APERF, cur->aperf.split.lo, cur->aperf.split.hi);
+	rdmsr(MSR_IA32_MPERF, cur->mperf.split.lo, cur->mperf.split.hi);
 
 	wrmsr(MSR_IA32_APERF, 0, 0);
 	wrmsr(MSR_IA32_MPERF, 0, 0);
@@ -281,7 +281,7 @@ static long read_measured_perf_ctrs(void *_cur)
 static unsigned int get_measured_perf(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
 				      unsigned int cpu)
 {
-	struct perf_cur cur;
+	struct perf_pair cur;
 	unsigned int perf_percent;
 	unsigned int retval;
 
@@ -294,39 +294,37 @@ static unsigned int get_measured_perf(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
 	 * Get an approximate value. Return failure in case we cannot get
 	 * an approximate value.
 	 */
-	if (unlikely(cur.aperf_cur.split.hi || cur.mperf_cur.split.hi)) {
+	if (unlikely(cur.aperf.split.hi || cur.mperf.split.hi)) {
 		int shift_count;
 		u32 h;
 
-		h = max_t(u32, cur.aperf_cur.split.hi, cur.mperf_cur.split.hi);
+		h = max_t(u32, cur.aperf.split.hi, cur.mperf.split.hi);
 		shift_count = fls(h);
 
-		cur.aperf_cur.whole >>= shift_count;
-		cur.mperf_cur.whole >>= shift_count;
+		cur.aperf.whole >>= shift_count;
+		cur.mperf.whole >>= shift_count;
 	}
 
-	if (((unsigned long)(-1) / 100) < cur.aperf_cur.split.lo) {
+	if (((unsigned long)(-1) / 100) < cur.aperf.split.lo) {
 		int shift_count = 7;
-		cur.aperf_cur.split.lo >>= shift_count;
-		cur.mperf_cur.split.lo >>= shift_count;
+		cur.aperf.split.lo >>= shift_count;
+		cur.mperf.split.lo >>= shift_count;
 	}
 
-	if (cur.aperf_cur.split.lo && cur.mperf_cur.split.lo)
-		perf_percent = (cur.aperf_cur.split.lo * 100) /
-				cur.mperf_cur.split.lo;
+	if (cur.aperf.split.lo && cur.mperf.split.lo)
+		perf_percent = (cur.aperf.split.lo * 100) / cur.mperf.split.lo;
 	else
 		perf_percent = 0;
 
 #else
-	if (unlikely(((unsigned long)(-1) / 100) < cur.aperf_cur.whole)) {
+	if (unlikely(((unsigned long)(-1) / 100) < cur.aperf.whole)) {
 		int shift_count = 7;
-		cur.aperf_cur.whole >>= shift_count;
-		cur.mperf_cur.whole >>= shift_count;
+		cur.aperf.whole >>= shift_count;
+		cur.mperf.whole >>= shift_count;
 	}
 
-	if (cur.aperf_cur.whole && cur.mperf_cur.whole)
-		perf_percent = (cur.aperf_cur.whole * 100) /
-				cur.mperf_cur.whole;
+	if (cur.aperf.whole && cur.mperf.whole)
+		perf_percent = (cur.aperf.whole * 100) / cur.mperf.whole;
 	else
 		perf_percent = 0;
 
-- 
1.6.0.6

-- 


  reply	other threads:[~2009-04-06 18:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-04-06 18:26 [patch 0/2] acpi x86: Make aperf mperf MSR usage in acpi_cpufreq read only venkatesh.pallipadi
2009-04-06 18:26 ` venkatesh.pallipadi [this message]
2009-04-07  5:34   ` [patch 1/2] acpi x86: Cleanup acpi_cpufreq structures related to aperf/mperf Len Brown
2009-04-06 18:26 ` [patch 2/2] acpi x86: Make aperf/mperf MSR access in acpi_cpufreq read_only venkatesh.pallipadi
2009-04-07  5:35   ` Len Brown

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090406182723.927683000@intel.com \
    --to=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.