On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 11:07 AM Yunfeng Ye <yeyunf...@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> It's not a good way to access phys_proc_id and cpu_die_id directly.
> So using topology_physical_package_id(cpu) and topology_die_id(cpu)
> instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunf...@huawei.com>
Srinivas, Rui, any concerns?
> ---
> drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c
> b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c
> index c9e57237d778..5f3d39b8212a 100644
> --- a/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c
> +++ b/drivers/powercap/intel_rapl_common.c
> @@ -1309,7 +1309,6 @@ struct rapl_package *rapl_add_package(int cpu, struct
> rapl_if_priv *priv)
> {
> int id = topology_logical_die_id(cpu);
> struct rapl_package *rp;
> - struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu);
> int ret;
>
> if (!rapl_defaults)
> @@ -1326,10 +1325,11 @@ struct rapl_package *rapl_add_package(int cpu, struct
> rapl_if_priv *priv)
>
> if (topology_max_die_per_package() > 1)
> snprintf(rp->name, PACKAGE_DOMAIN_NAME_LENGTH,
> - "package-%d-die-%d", c->phys_proc_id, c->cpu_die_id);
> + "package-%d-die-%d",
> + topology_physical_package_id(cpu),
> topology_die_id(cpu));
> else
> snprintf(rp->name, PACKAGE_DOMAIN_NAME_LENGTH, "package-%d",
> - c->phys_proc_id);
> + topology_physical_package_id(cpu));
>
> /* check if the package contains valid domains */
> if (rapl_detect_domains(rp, cpu) || rapl_defaults->check_unit(rp,
> cpu)) {
> --
> 2.27.0
>
