From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44A0F17A58F; Thu, 15 May 2025 15:49:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747324160; cv=none; b=bwVHkj1YF0d16+zuicbVumc1BTwU5OQ8AUIcsn06r0i36XQU6LkkfXlXfOpH3koKPIxfY7tan4/QHQ24awXfceNjTDHazz6+RCMUYXPxLwHfu+gaHruSKPoNmrvgFiLxYoldc2TU8/EeI6IST9a3cmke9wEBrJtoOnowU2oKBsk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747324160; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Vx9qUQIItg/S4+4nYCEad05056XH48R2umxYRa5UWEA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=YhKKaF/Z0LGP2LKNgN/H4jslmxH0FCI8c7iqsET9ot/NfurUOoDHx5jHYJCrsnpE+pSDX81p4huojJpiWxvK5Dxgs1hFK7/Bb6Y2ZuHAHfoEp2TSMoyo1TMrxKi1oXtW+dS8Pz8N23B1wfw4IkCuC0WXjoRfi7ixAVLU2NCdTCM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=cIqY3l+E; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="cIqY3l+E" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D10AC4CEE7; Thu, 15 May 2025 15:49:14 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1747324156; bh=Vx9qUQIItg/S4+4nYCEad05056XH48R2umxYRa5UWEA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=cIqY3l+EIEaPk0oi267TmfcfdOOjqarZaMdC/otccwOnBnO0Jbma/54wtU7Ke04bt qbhSW2GUS/nH3wxO4OSZexPDjk1DVTf1pr92Yt4+BOYjJlLLxrKbTzoz/xZ2YX+VuD yTrCZ6QguW30ek+mZrIrpe640Y+6VVX3UOnh6grIYpcLvJbY6ujrZE/1iIkKuOTAa/ J8Qh61fF8QTKVZmtQXFF2ULaJmZZ7xKbizg/JOY5t1lGRTY4q91lH7KHygNm3eFWRv L8uDQcb/9wiKaPfDT9X3z7h6f75gaZp0uRxEJYn1Cr91rHIe28xdLlbQiIb+TjM35z ONi+0WP8yn3Ig== Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 17:49:12 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Mario Limonciello Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Dhananjay Ugwekar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pm tree Message-ID: References: <20250512145517.6e0666e3@canb.auug.org.au> <20250512152326.3f2f0226@canb.auug.org.au> <8c4ab851-1853-442e-90a9-225be16c804c@amd.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8c4ab851-1853-442e-90a9-225be16c804c@amd.com> * Mario Limonciello wrote: > On 5/12/2025 12:23 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > On Mon, 12 May 2025 14:55:17 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in: > > > > > > drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c > > > > > > between commit: > > > > > > 608a76b65288 ("cpufreq/amd-pstate: Add support for the "Requested CPU Min frequency" BIOS option") > > > > > > from the pm tree and commit: > > > > > > d7484babd2c4 ("x86/msr: Rename 'rdmsrl_on_cpu()' to 'rdmsrq_on_cpu()'") > > > > > > from the tip tree. > > > > > > I fixed it up (the former removed a line updated by the latter) and can > > > carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is > > > concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your > > > upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may > > > also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting > > > tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts. > > > > Actually it needed the fix up below. > > > > Ingo, > > Can you guys make an immutable branch for Rafael to merge into linux-pm for > this change? > > I can redo the amd-pstate merge based on that immutable branch. > > Rafael, > > If you want to just carry the fixup that's fine too. Just LMK what you > need. If it's only about rdmsrl_on_cpu(), how about the simple compatibility wrapper below instead, applied to the x86 tree? Can merge it into -tip and tomorrow's -next would resolve this without any changes or merges done to the PM tree. Thanks, Ingo ===============> arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h index a9ce56fc8785..4096b8af4ba7 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h @@ -329,6 +329,7 @@ static inline int wrmsr_safe_regs_on_cpu(unsigned int cpu, u32 regs[8]) /* Compatibility wrappers: */ #define rdmsrl(msr, val) rdmsrq(msr, val) #define wrmsrl(msr, val) wrmsrq(msr, val) +#define rdmsrl_on_cpu(cpu, msr, q) rdmsrq_on_cpu(cpu, msr, q) #endif /* __ASSEMBLER__ */ #endif /* _ASM_X86_MSR_H */