[AMD Official Use Only - AMD Internal Distribution Only]

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2025 4:32 PM
> To: Penny, Zheng <[email protected]>
> Cc: Stabellini, Stefano <[email protected]>; Huang, Ray
> <[email protected]>; Ragiadakou, Xenia <[email protected]>;
> Andryuk, Jason <[email protected]>; Andrew Cooper
> <[email protected]>; Julien Grall <[email protected]>; Stefano Stabellini
> <[email protected]>; Roger Pau MonnĂ© <[email protected]>; xen-
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 03/11] xen/x86: introduce "cpufreq=amd-pstate" xen
> cmdline
>
> On 15.01.2025 09:18, Penny, Zheng wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
> >> Sent: Thursday, January 9, 2025 5:59 PM
> >>
> >> On 03.12.2024 09:11, Penny Zheng wrote:
> >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/platform_hypercall.c
> >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/platform_hypercall.c
> >>> @@ -574,6 +574,12 @@ ret_t do_platform_op(
> >>>
> >>>          case XEN_PM_CPPC:
> >>>          {
> >>> +            if ( !(xen_processor_pmbits & XEN_PROCESSOR_PM_CPPC) )
> >>> +            {
> >>> +                ret = -ENOSYS;
> >>
> >> ENOSYS isn't appropriate for such a situation.
> >
> > I've mirrored the return value, so maybe -EINVAL is better?
>
> Generally most wrong uses of ENOSYS want replacing by EOPNOTSUPP.

Oh, understood.

>
> Jan

Many thanks,
Penny

Reply via email to