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 S1753006AbbLDSEe (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 4 Dec 2015 13:04:34 -0500
Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:59194 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1750963AbbLDSEd (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 4 Dec 2015 13:04:33 -0500
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 19:04:26 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Amy Wiles <amy.l.wiles@intel.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/rapl: Do not load in a guest
Message-ID: <20151204180426.GM21177@pd.tnic>
References: <1449167222-17562-1-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de>
 <20151204074206.GB24827@gmail.com>
 <20151204082256.GC17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20151204082823.GA31591@gmail.com>
 <20151204101954.GA21177@pd.tnic>
 <56616DBF.8040900@redhat.com>
 <20151204105617.GB21177@pd.tnic>
 <20151204115335.GB15308@gmail.com>
 <20151204094642.4c5e63e0@icelake>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20151204094642.4c5e63e0@icelake>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 09:46:42AM -0800, Jacob Pan wrote:
> Since RAPL is not architectural, consistency of hw support needs lots
> of improvement at the least.

It should have received a CPUID bit, no matter if it is architectural or
not.

> This error message is valid in other than VM. Domain detection error
> already propagated.

Huh, didn't I say that?

> This is good for the first level RAPL detection. The only way is to
> base detection on known CPU models.

...and yet Hannes sees it on a minnowboard. CCed.

The CPU model-based detection is ugly and does not always work, as
you see.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.