On Tue, 2018-04-10 at 11:32 -0700, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
> drivers/hwmon/peci-cputemp.c | 783
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/hwmon/peci-dimmtemp.c | 432 +++++++++++++++++++++++
Does it make sense one driver per patch?
> +#define CLIENT_CPU_ID_MASK 0xf0ff0 /* Mask for Family / Model
> info */
> +struct cpu_gen_info {
> + u32 type;
> + u32 cpu_id;
> + u32 core_max;
> +};
>
> +static const struct cpu_gen_info cpu_gen_info_table[] = {
> + { .type = CPU_GEN_HSX,
> + .cpu_id = 0x306f0, /* Family code: 6, Model number: 63
> (0x3f) */
> + .core_max = CORE_MAX_ON_HSX },
> + { .type = CPU_GEN_BRX,
> + .cpu_id = 0x406f0, /* Family code: 6, Model number: 79
> (0x4f) */
> + .core_max = CORE_MAX_ON_BDX },
> + { .type = CPU_GEN_SKX,
> + .cpu_id = 0x50650, /* Family code: 6, Model number: 85
> (0x55) */
> + .core_max = CORE_MAX_ON_SKX },
> +};
Are we talking about x86 CPU IDs here?
If so, why x86 corresponding headers, including intel-family.h are not
used?
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Intel Finland Oy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
