On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 11:07 AM Yunfeng Ye <yeyunf...@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> It's not a good way to access the phys_proc_id of cpuinfo directly.
> So using topology_physical_package_id(cpu) instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunf...@huawei.com>
Srinivas, Rui, any concerns?
> ---
> drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c
> b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c
> index 5f3d39b8212a..8888adcb3927 100644
> --- a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c
> +++ b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c
> @@ -547,7 +547,7 @@ static void rapl_init_domains(struct rapl_package *rp)
>
> if (i == RAPL_DOMAIN_PLATFORM && rp->id > 0) {
> snprintf(rd->name, RAPL_DOMAIN_NAME_LENGTH, "psys-%d",
> - cpu_data(rp->lead_cpu).phys_proc_id);
> + topology_physical_package_id(rp->lead_cpu));
> } else
> snprintf(rd->name, RAPL_DOMAIN_NAME_LENGTH, "%s",
> rapl_domain_names[i]);
> --
> 2.27.0
>
