linux-acpi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).