On 2026-01-22 04:42, Jan Beulich wrote:
Share space with the ACPI and powernow drivers, avoiding a separate
allocation for each CPU. Except for get_hwp_para() all use sites already
have the policy available, and this one function can simply be brought
closer to its sibling set_hwp_para().
Minor, but maybe 's/function/function's signature/'. The original
phrasing made me think it was code movement.
This then also eliminates the concern over hwp_cpufreq_cpu_init() being
called for all CPUs
We expect hwp_cpufreq_cpu_init() to be called for each CPU, so I am
confused by this statement. The data...
>, or a CPU going offline that's recorded in> policy->cpu (which would
result in accesses of per-CPU data of offline
CPUs).
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
---
hwp_cpufreq_target() still requires policy->cpu to be online, though.
--- a/xen/arch/x86/acpi/cpufreq/hwp.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/acpi/cpufreq/hwp.c
-static DEFINE_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY(struct hwp_drv_data *, hwp_drv_data);
... here is tracked and filled per-CPU.
Do we need cpufreq_add_cpu() to force hw_all = 1 for HWP (and maybe
AMD-CPPC) to ensure that policy is allocated per-CPU?
Are we implicitly relying on shared_type == CPUFREQ_SHARED_TYPE_HW to do
that for us?
The code here is okay, fwiw.
Thanks,
Jason
