On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 09:33:59AM +1000, Jonathan Matthew wrote: > On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 10:20:52AM +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 11:21:45AM -0500, Todd Mortimer wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 02:41:11AM +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 09:53:39AM -0500, Todd Mortimer wrote: > > > > > My CPU has a CCP that isn't in the known list, so add it and tell ccp > > > > > about it. > > > > > > > > > > Tested on Ryzen 3900x. > > > > > > > > > > ok? > > > > > > > > > > Will commit a pcidevs regen immediately after. > > > > > > > > Are your cpu lines in dmesg 17-3* or 17-7*? > > > > Ryzen 3900x should be model 7X. > > > > > > 17-71-00. > > > > > > cpu0: AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 12-Core Processor, 3792.88 MHz, 17-71-00 > > > > > > I assume then change the constant bits to 17_7X and 17h/7xh ? > > > > Yes, unless that device id is also known to appear on earlier > > models as well, in which case the first appearance is used. > > Also found here: > > cpu3: AMD EPYC 7502P 32-Core Processor, 2495.32 MHz, 17-31-00 > > vendor "AMD", unknown product 0x1486 (class crypto subclass miscellaneous, > rev 0x00) at pci8 dev 0 function 1 not configured >
In that case, the original 17/3x labelling would be correct, which also agrees with some of the other pcidev ids in the same numeric range. I have to admit, I would be just as happy to just label everything 17h and drop the /[123..]x parts, but I don't really mind one way or the other. ok for the original diff then?
