From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/11] x86/intel_pstate: add new policy
 fields and a new driver interface
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:15:51 +0100
Message-ID: <5582EEB70200007800086ACC@mail.emea.novell.com>
References: <1434011209-16925-1-git-send-email-wei.w.wang@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1434011209-16925-1-git-send-email-wei.w.wang@intel.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com>
Cc: andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

>>> On 11.06.15 at 10:26, <wei.w.wang@intel.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/drivers/cpufreq/utility.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/cpufreq/utility.c
> @@ -457,6 +457,12 @@ int __cpufreq_set_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *data,
>      data->min = policy->min;
>      data->max = policy->max;
>  
> +    if (cpufreq_driver->setpolicy) {
> +        data->limits.min_perf_pct = policy->limits.min_perf_pct;
> +        data->limits.max_perf_pct = policy->limits.max_perf_pct;

For one you leave all other data->limits fields uninitialized - please
use "data->limits = policy->limits". And then I don't see why this
should be done inside the if() - there's no obvious connection
between ->setpolicy being non-NULL and ->limits having meaning
to the driver - this is solely your intended _use_ model.

> --- a/xen/include/acpi/cpufreq/cpufreq.h
> +++ b/xen/include/acpi/cpufreq/cpufreq.h
> @@ -41,6 +41,18 @@ struct cpufreq_cpuinfo {
>      unsigned int        transition_latency; /* in 10^(-9) s = nanoseconds */
>  };
>  
> +struct perf_limits {
> +    int no_turbo;
> +    int turbo_disabled;

Both bool_t I suppose.

> @@ -52,6 +64,8 @@ struct cpufreq_policy {
>      unsigned int        max;    /* in kHz */
>      unsigned int        cur;    /* in kHz, only needed if cpufreq
>                                   * governors are used */
> +    unsigned int        policy;

This field isn't being used anywhere here. Please add it upon first use.

Jan