From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752332AbcAMV4J (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 13 Jan 2016 16:56:09 -0500
Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:23278 "EHLO mga02.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1750786AbcAMV4G (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 13 Jan 2016 16:56:06 -0500
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,291,1449561600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="859975441"
Message-ID: <1452722083.3092.92.camel@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] powercap/rapl: reduce ipi calls
From: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        X86 Kernel <x86@kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 13:54:43 -0800
In-Reply-To: <20160113212602.GT12897@pd.tnic>
References: <1452647483-14244-1-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
	 <1452647483-14244-3-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
	 <alpine.DEB.2.11.1601131042590.3575@nanos>
	 <20160113082113.3314fa92@icelake> <20160113163610.GH12897@pd.tnic>
	 <20160113095124.186ff487@yairi> <20160113180412.GN12897@pd.tnic>
	 <20160113102138.4e34e890@yairi> <20160113191622.GP12897@pd.tnic>
	 <20160113121003.3e9c2108@yairi> <20160113212602.GT12897@pd.tnic>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.3 (3.18.3-1.fc23) 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2016-01-13 at 22:26 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:

[Cut]

> 
> 	rmwmsrl_safe_on_cpu(policy->cpu, MSR_IA32_PERF_CTL,
> 			    INTEL_PERF_CTL_MASK,
> 			    (u32)sfi_cpufreq_array[next_perf_state].ctr
> l_val & INTEL_PERF_CTL_MASK);
> 
> Yikes!
> 
> So yes, it can work but it is ugly, hard to parse and use, not
> generic
> enough, etc, etc.
> 
> So thanks, but no thanks.
> 
I agree, in some cases it will not make much sense to use read-
modify_write calls, the user may decide whether it makes sense or not.
But such interface is not new to Linux kernel:

regmap_update_bits(), which is referenced for 346 times.

Are you saying that any such calls are not useful?

Thanks,
Srinivas