On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 08:18:09PM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> index 2c57fffebf9b..f080be35da41 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> @@ -801,6 +801,31 @@ static void init_speculation_control(struct cpuinfo_x86
> *c)
> }
> }
>
> +static void get_cqm_info(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> +{
> + if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC)) {
> + u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> +
> + /* QoS sub-leaf, EAX=0Fh, ECX=0 */
> + cpuid_count(0x0000000F, 0, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> + /* will be overridden if occupancy monitoring exists */
> + c->x86_cache_max_rmid = ebx;
> +
> + if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_OCCUP_LLC) ||
> + cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_TOTAL) ||
> + cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_LOCAL)) {
> + /* QoS sub-leaf, EAX=0Fh, ECX=1 */
> + cpuid_count(0x0000000F, 1, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> +
> + c->x86_cache_max_rmid = ecx;
> + c->x86_cache_occ_scale = ebx;
> + }
> + } else {
> + c->x86_cache_max_rmid = -1;
> + c->x86_cache_occ_scale = -1;
> + }
> +}
> +
> void get_cpu_cap(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> {
> u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> @@ -832,33 +857,6 @@ void get_cpu_cap(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> c->x86_capability[CPUID_D_1_EAX] = eax;
> }
>
> - /* Additional Intel-defined flags: level 0x0000000F */
> - if (c->cpuid_level >= 0x0000000F) {
> -
> - /* QoS sub-leaf, EAX=0Fh, ECX=0 */
> - cpuid_count(0x0000000F, 0, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> - c->x86_capability[CPUID_F_0_EDX] = edx;
> -
> - if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC)) {
> - /* will be overridden if occupancy monitoring exists */
> - c->x86_cache_max_rmid = ebx;
> -
> - /* QoS sub-leaf, EAX=0Fh, ECX=1 */
> - cpuid_count(0x0000000F, 1, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> - c->x86_capability[CPUID_F_1_EDX] = edx;
> -
> - if ((cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_OCCUP_LLC)) ||
> - ((cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_TOTAL)) ||
> - (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_LOCAL)))) {
> - c->x86_cache_max_rmid = ecx;
> - c->x86_cache_occ_scale = ebx;
> - }
> - } else {
> - c->x86_cache_max_rmid = -1;
> - c->x86_cache_occ_scale = -1;
> - }
> - }
Why are you doing this carving out into a separate function since you're
keeping the cpuinfo_x86 members?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
