On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 05:28:55PM +0000, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> > +void arch_scale_freq_tick(void)
> > +{
> > + u64 aperf, mperf;
> > + u64 acnt, mcnt;
> > +
> > + if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_APERFMPERF))
> > + return;
> > +
> > + aperf = rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_APERF);
> > + mperf = rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_APERF);
> > +
> > + acnt = aperf - this_cpu_read(arch_prev_aperf);
> > + mcnt = mperf - this_cpu_read(arch_prev_mperf);
> > +
> > + this_cpu_write(arch_prev_aperf, aperf);
> > + this_cpu_write(arch_prev_mperf, mperf);
> > +
> > + this_cpu_write(arch_cpu_freq, div64_u64(acnt * SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE, mcnt));
>
> Wasn't there the problem that this ratio goes to zero if the cpu is idle
> in the old power estimation approach on x86?
Yeah, there was something funky.
SDM says they only count in C0 (ie. !idle), so it _should_ work.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
